Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Analytical Report
Date: 14/11/2013
Contents
Introduction .................................................................................... 2
Summary ........................................................................................ 6
1. SMEs most pressing problems .............................................. 15
2. SMEs use of external financing ............................................. 19
2.1 Use of different sources of financing .................................................. 19
2.2 Experiences with applications for external financing .......................... 27
2.3 Loans as external sources of financing .............................................. 41
1
2013 Ipsos MORI.
Legal notice
European Union, 2013
This survey was requested by the Directorate General for Enterprise and Industry of the European
Commission, in cooperation with the European Central Bank.
The survey was conducted by Ipsos MORI.
This document does not represent the point of view of the European Commission or the European
Central Bank. The interpretations and opinions contained in it are solely those of the authors.
This publication is financed under the Competitiveness and Innovation framework Programme (CIP)
which aims to encourage the competitiveness of European enterprises.
Introduction
Access to finance is a key determinant for business start-up, development and growth for
small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs1) and they have very different needs and face
different challenges with regard to financing compared to large businesses2. The latter have
ready access to equity capital markets, which are not accessible to the vast majority of small
businesses. The lack of equity capital invested in small firms makes these businesses more
reliant on other sources such as bank lending and other types of financial products.
The differing financial characteristics of SMEs compared with larger ones require different
policy responses to foster a functioning finance market for them. Reflecting this and the
importance of SMEs within the overall economy and economic success of Europe3,
addressing the needs of SMEs has been given increasing focus within European policy
making. Over the past two decades the European Commission (EC) has aimed to develop a
comprehensive range of financial policies and instruments to support SMEs with the most
appropriate sources and types of financing at each stage of their life.
The current economic environment has brought SME needs into particular focus given the
significantly tightened credit supply conditions arising from the reduced ability and willingness
of banks to provide the financing on which this sector is particularly reliant.
The EC and the European Central Bank (ECB) decided in 2008 to collaborate on a survey on
the access to finance of SMEs in the European Union and established the Survey on the
Access to Finance of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SAFE). The survey, conducted
across 37 countries, including the 28 European Union (EU) and 17 euro area countries was
undertaken in June-July 2009, in August-October 2011 and most recently in August-October
2013.
This report details the feedback from the 2013 wave and examines wave-on-wave significant
changes between the surveys.
SMEs are defined in this report as firms with 1-249 employees; LSEs as firms with 250+ employees
Association of Chartered Certified Accountants UK Small Business Committee including Chittenden,
F. Manchester Business School et al (March 2006): Policy Briefing Paper: Improving access to finance
for small firms.
3
Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) are a key part of the European Union corporate sector
accounting for more than 99% of all business and two-third of employment
2
It focuses on the findings from the 28 EU countries. Other countries participating in the
Entrepreneurship and Innovation Programme (EIP)4 are also included in this survey and are
therefore shown in the reports charts and with some commentary.
In detail, the survey examines SMEs:
-
Financial situation, growth (past and future), innovative activities and need for
external financing
Use of loans, the size and reasons behind taking out specific loans
Views about the extent to which different types of financing are available to them
Expectations about future financing with banks and other sources of finance
Further details of the interviewing methods, sampling and weights applied can be found in
the Appendix 1.
Company size micro (1-9 employees), small (10-49), medium (50-249) and large
(250+)
Turnover up to 2 million per annum, 2-10 million per annum, 10-50 million per
annum and more than 50 million per annum
Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Croatia, FYROM (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia),
Montenegro, Turkey and Serbia all participate fully in the EIP, while Israel and Albania are involved in
certain
parts,
see:http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/international/competitivenessinnovation/participation/index_en.htm
4
Length of time active under two years, two to four, five to nine years and 10 years
or more
The analysis of the SME results in this report is based on the employment criterion. We also
examined innovative5 companies and those showing higher levels of growth. High-growth
companies are defined as those SMEs which are experiencing growth of more than 20% per
year over a period of three years. The term gazelle is used for high-growth companies that
are young, which is defined as all those that are up to five years old. Both types of SMEs
often have particular issues around securing the necessary additional funding to maintain
their high growth.
In each of the reports sections that follow, we look first at experiences, attitudes and
behaviours of SMEs, and how these may have changed over time, at an EU-wide level (i.e.
across all 28 countries) before examining significant differences between the countries
covered and across the aforementioned company characteristics (i.e. size, turnover, sector,
etc.). We have also charted the results for other covered countries. Some totals, in the
charts or elsewhere, may not sum to 100%, this is due to the inclusion of some questions
allowing multiple answers and/or due to rounding of individual percentages.
Innovative SMEs are defined as having introduced innovation in at least one area, such as products,
services, marketing, production or management see Section 5 for further details
5
Summary
Most pressing problem
-
Access to finance was the second most pressing problem mentioned by 15% of EU
SME managers. Only finding customers was a greater problem. Access to finance
was mentioned as the most pressing problem by 40% of SMEs in Cyprus, 32% in
Greece, 23% in Spain and Croatia, 22% in Slovenia, and 20% each in Italy, Ireland
and the Netherlands. It was least likely to be mentioned in Germany (8%), Austria
(7%) and Luxembourg (6%).
When rated on a 10 point scale, the severity of the problem of getting access to
finance was most pressing in Slovakia (42% of SMEs rating it as 10 out of 10, i.e.
extremely pressing), followed by Greece (28%) and Cyprus (26%). It was least likely
to be judged as extremely pressing in Estonia (only 3%), Finland (5%) and the Czech
Republic (5%).
Use of financing
-
When looking at sources of financing used in the last six months, just over half of EU
SMEs (54%) said that they had used only external financing, which was slightly lower
than 2011 levels (56%). Just over one in five had used both internal and external
sources of financing, whilst only 4% had used only internal sources (unchanged from
2011 levels).
SMEs (i.e. firms with 1-249 employees) were more likely than larger enterprises (i.e.
LSEs - firms with 250+ employees) to have only used external financing (54%
compared with 43%). LSEs were more likely to have used both internal and external
sources of financing (47% compared with just 22% of SMEs).
The most widely used external sources of financing in 2013 were bank overdrafts
(39%), leasing/hire purchasing/factoring (35%), trade credit (32%) and bank loans
(32%). These were very similar to 2011 levels. Overall, 75% of EU SMEs had used at
least one form of debt financing (excluding debt securities and equity) in the past six
months and this is unchanged from 2011 levels.
Equity financing was little used, by just 5% of EU SMEs in the past six months. This
was slightly lower than the 2011 level of 7%. It was most likely to be used by SMEs
with a stock market listing (17%), by the largest SMEs (10% of those with a turnover
exceeding 50 million) and by 9% of gazelles (i.e. SMEs less than five years old
which have grown at over 20% per annum).
Just over a fifth (21%) of EU SMEs had applied for a bank loan in the past six
months, up from 19% in 2011. The same level (21%) had applied for a bank
overdraft. One in six (16%) had applied for trade credit and one in seven (14%) for
some other form of external financing.
SMEs in Luxembourg (32%), France (30%) and Slovenia (30%) were most likely to
have applied for a bank loan in the past six months and those in Denmark (8%),
6
Estonia (8%) and Latvia (5%) were least likely. Bank overdrafts/credit lines/credit card
overdrafts were most likely to have been applied for by SMEs in Italy (35%) and
Slovenia (32%) and least likely in Estonia (4%), Sweden (4%) and Greece (5%).
Trade credit was most likely to have been requested by SMEs in Greece (34%) and
Italy (30%) and least likely by SMEs in Estonia (2%) and Latvia (3%).
-
The most common reason for not applying for bank loans or bank overdrafts was
having sufficient internal funds, but a minority did not apply because of possible
rejection. In the case of bank loans 7% of EU SMEs did not apply because of possible
rejection. This was most likely to have occurred for SMEs in Ireland (16% not
applying for loans, 12% for overdrafts), Greece (15% for loans, 12% for overdrafts)
and Cyprus (15% for both loans and overdrafts). Young SMEs active between 2 and
5 years were also more likely than average not to apply for a loan because of
possible rejection (11%).
Larger SMEs with 50+ employees were more likely to have applied for bank loans
than micro-SMEs (with only 1-9 employees) and less likely to be concerned about
rejection, either for a bank loan or a bank overdraft.
Nearly two-thirds of EU SMEs who applied for external finance got everything they
applied for from banks or trade credit. However, about one third of SMEs applied but
got only part of the bank loan or overdraft applied for, were rejected or refused the
loan/overdraft because the cost was too high.
The proportion getting everything requested has increased slightly since 2011 for
bank overdrafts (from 61% to 62%) and bank loans (from 63% to 65%). There was a
much bigger increase for wholly successful applications for other external financing
(from 71% in 2011 to 80% in 2013) but a slight tightening for trade credit (down from
69% to 67% getting everything).
Applying for bank loans and/or overdrafts were the most likely types of finance to be
rejected (13% for loans, 10% for overdrafts). In the case of bank loans 16% of SMEs
who applied received less than applied for, 13% were rejected and 2% declined the
loan offer because the cost was too high.
SMEs in Germany (87%), Finland (81%) and Austria (80%) were the most likely to
have got everything they requested when applying for a bank loan. The highest levels
of rejection for bank loans were seen in the Netherlands (31%), Greece (31%),
Lithuania (24%) and Cyprus (23%).
Bank loans were also most likely to be given in full to the largest companies (72% for
LSEs compared with 65% for SMEs) and larger SMEs rather than micro-SMEs.
Younger and smaller firms were more likely to get only some of the bank loan
requested or to be rejected. 18% of micro-SMEs had bank loans rejected compared
to only 3% of LSE applications, and the rejection level was 27% for SMEs active for
less than two years.
Half (50%) of EU SMEs have taken out a loan in the past two years, the same overall
level as seen in 2011 but still up on 2009 (46%). SMEs in Greece, Denmark, Cyprus
and Latvia were least likely to have taken out a loan in that time (under one-third had
done so), whilst those in Slovenia, France and Belgium were the most likely (over
60%). Micro-SMEs were the least likely to have done so 43% of those with just 1-9
employees compared with 59% of the largest SMEs (50+ staff).
-
Among those SMEs which had borrowed, the most common amount (36% of all
loans) was 100,000 to 1 million, but just over half (52%) had borrowed less than
100,000. The size of loan has gradually increased from 2009 and 2011 to 2013,
33% borrowing 100,000 to 1 million in 2011 and 29% borrowing 100,000 to 1
million in 2009.
Loans of over 1 million were most likely to be taken out by SMEs in Malta (12% of
all SMEs borrowing that amount in the last two years) and the Netherlands (11%)
whilst at the other end of the scale, the smallest loans (under 25,000) were most
likely in Croatia (18% of all SMEs), Poland (18%) and Slovakia (16%).
Clearly the most common provider of loans to EU SMEs were banks, providing the
loan to 85% of all SMEs who had borrowed in the last two years. This was slightly
lower than the 2011 level (87%). Only one in seven borrowed from non-bank sources,
either from a private individual such as family or friend (5%) or from another source,
such as microfinance institutions or government sources (9% of loans). SMEs in
Luxembourg and Greece were the most likely to have relied on a bank providing the
loan (98% and 96% respectively).
The most frequent reasons for taking out the loan in the last two years were for land,
buildings, equipment or vehicles (44%) or as working capital (43%). This was similar
to the overall EU SME ratio seen in 2011 and 2009. However, the loan was most
likely to be needed for working capital in Cyprus (73%) where the level of need for
this had risen considerably from 2011 (from 41%). In contrast the need to use the
loan for working capital had fallen since 2011, particularly in Greece (down from 85%
to 59%) and Latvia (from 67% to 43%).
Overall EU SME managers were more pessimistic than optimistic about the general
economic outlook by about 2:1, with 34% saying that the economic outlook had
deteriorated in the past six months whilst 16% felt it had improved, and 44% thought
it remained unchanged. The overall balance of opinion (proportion improved less
deteriorated) in 2013 was -18%. The most optimistic opinions came from EU SME
managers in Denmark (+16%), Latvia (+7%) and the UK (+7%). The most pessimistic
views came from Slovenia (-50%), Cyprus (-48%) and France (-46%).
The balance of opinion has become less negative compared to 2011 when the net
balance of opinion was -30% and in 2009 when it was -56%. Results have improved
or stayed about the same in the majority of countries since 2011, except for some big
increases in negative opinions in Cyprus (from -6% to -48% net balance), Latvia
(+35% to +7%), Lithuania (+24% to +1%) and Finland (-20% to -39%).
Overall, SME managers were a little more likely to be optimistic about their own firmspecific outlook with regard to sales and profitability in the past six months compared
to the general economic outlook. Across the EU, 22% felt their firms outlook had
improved whilst the same proportion (22%) judged it to have deteriorated, giving a net
balance of opinion of 0%. This has improved on the 2011 level of -6%. In 2013,
managers were most optimistic in Denmark (net balance of +26%) and the UK
(+20%), and outside the EU in Turkey (+29%). The least optimistic countries were
France (-23%) and Cyprus (-45%) where the net balance of opinion had clearly
worsened since 2011. Views were generally more positive the larger the company.
-
Overall, EU SME managers were more likely to consider that their firms own capital
had improved (27%) rather than deteriorated (19%) over the past six months giving a
net balance of opinion of +8%, but only a little better than the +5% result in 2011.
Managers were most positive in Denmark (+37%), Germany (+30%) and Norway
(+40%). They were most negative in Cyprus (-25%) and Greece (-18%), followed by
Spain (-13%) and France (-12%). Opinions had improved from 2011 in only a few
countries, in particular Romania, Iceland and Ireland. However, results had
particularly worsened in Cyprus (from 12% to -25%) and France (from +7% to
12%).
Almost twice as many managers judged that their firms own credit history had
improved over the past six months (23%) rather than worsened (12%), giving a net
balance of opinion of +11%. This was only slightly higher than the 2011 EU average
of +9%. Managers in Germany (+27%), Estonia (+27%) and the UK (+26%) had the
most positive net balance results, whilst the lowest were reported from Cyprus (-19%)
and Italy (-14%).
Over two-fifths of EU managers (44%) could not give an opinion as to whether access
to public financial support had changed in the past six months since this had not
applied to their firm. Among those able to give a view they were four times as likely to
report that it had deteriorated (17%) rather than improved (4%), i.e. a net balance of
opinion of -13%. This was a less negative balance than in 2011 (-20%). Only three
EU countries had a positive net balance of opinion Latvia (+3%), Estonia (+2%) and
Malta (+1%). The biggest net deterioration over the past six months was reported
from managers in Spain (-36%) and Cyprus (-31%).
Where able to give an opinion, the most common viewpoint among EU SME
managers was that the availability of bank loans had not changed over the past six
months (43%). The net balance of opinion was that availability had worsened (-6%)
with 15% reporting deterioration and 9% an improvement. There was a very similar
balance of opinion as to the availability of bank overdrafts, credit lines or credit card
overdrafts (also a net balance of opinion of -6%). The situation was only slightly better
for trade credit (8% deteriorated, 5% improved, -3% net balance) among the 50% of
SMEs able to give an opinion.
The overall balance of opinion was that EU SMEs need for a bank loan was little
more likely to have increased (16%) than decreased (12%) over the past six months.
The most common opinion (43%) was that the level of need had not changed, and
the remainder did not consider that this was relevant to their firm. This balance of
opinion was almost unchanged from 2011 (12% decreased need, 15% increased).
There were similar results for the need for bank overdrafts/credit lines/card overdrafts
(11% decreased need, 18% increased). There was also a slightly greater level
reporting increased need for trade credit (10%) rather than decreased need (6%).
Results for both forms of financing were very similar to 2011.
The highest levels of increased need for a bank loan were seen in Cyprus (29%
increased), Greece (26%) and France (23%). The biggest levels of decreased need
were in Finland (23%), Slovenia (19%) and Austria (18%).
There was little difference in the balance of changed needs for bank loans between
different sizes of SME from the smallest (1-9 employees) to those with 50-249 staff,
and only a slightly greater level of increased need from micro-SMEs for a bank
overdraft compared to bigger firms.
Among those EU SMEs that had applied for bank financing, one in three (34%)
reported that interest rates had been increased in the past six months compared to
20% reporting a decrease and 41% no change. This was a marked shift from 2011
when over half (52%) reported that rates had been increased and only 8% that they
had decreased, with 33% seeing no change.
The smallest SMEs (1-9 employees) were the most likely to report increased interest
rates when applying for a bank loan (38%) than the largest SMEs (29% of those with
50-249 employees) and LSEs.
Non-interest related costs (fees, charges, commission) when EU SMEs applied for
bank loans were much more likely to be reported to have increased (43%) than
decreased (only 5%) over the past six months, with 46% reporting no change. This
was a slightly lower level of increase than seen in 2011 when 48% reported an
increase and 4% a decrease. These costs were also more likely to have increased for
the smallest SMEs (49%) than the largest SMEs (34%) and LSEs with 250+ staff
(33%).
Overall, opinions about the available size of bank loans among SME borrowers were
evenly balanced with 18% reporting that it had increased, 17% decreased and 59%
seeing no change over the past six months. This was similar to the 2011 results. The
size was more likely to have increased for the largest SMEs (21%) and LSEs (24%)
than the smallest (15%).
10
There was a similarly balance and even greater stability reported for the available
maturity of the loan in 2013 by SME bank borrowers (7% increase, 7% decrease and
77% no change).
However, collateral requirements for SME loans were clearly more likely to have
increased (32%) than decreased (3%) over the past six months (though with 60%
seeing no change), very similar to the 2011 results.
Similarly, the other conditions attached to bank loans to SMEs were more likely to
have increased (25%) than decreased (2%), although 61% reported no change. This
was slightly better than the 2011 results when 29% reported an increase.
Nearly three out of five (56%) EU SME managers in 2013 expected their turnover to
grow in the next two to three years, the same proportion as in 2011 (also 56%). Just
under a third (29%) expected turnover to remain the same size whilst 11% expected it
to get smaller.
Managers were most optimistic in Denmark (72% expecting growth) and least
optimistic in Cyprus (only 16%). Managers in Lithuania were the most likely to predict
strong growth (24% expecting growth of over 20% per year). The most pessimistic
predictions came from managers in Spain, with 26% expecting turnover to shrink
although this was lower than in 2011 (35%). The biggest fall in confidence was in
Cyprus.
Managers of LSEs were significantly more likely to expect growth (71%) than SMEs
(56%), with the largest SMEs being more optimistic than micro-SMEs. The
construction sector was the most pessimistic (17% expecting to shrink) and industrial
SMES the least pessimistic (only 9% expecting turnover to fall).
Nearly two-thirds of EU SMEs (63%) said they felt confident about talking with banks
about financing and obtaining the desired results, whilst 24% were not confident. This
was almost identical to the balance of opinion in 2011.
Most managers were unable to give an opinion about talking with equity
investors/venture capital firms about financing as it was not relevant to their firm, but
when they could do so they tended not to be confident (19%) rather than confident
(15%).
Confidence in talking to banks and getting the desired finance was strongest from
SME managers in Malta, Slovenia and Luxembourg (all over 80%). The least
confident country results were Cyprus and Greece (53% and 51% of managers
respectively were not confident). Cyprus has seen a big fall in confidence since 2011.
The most confident about talking to banks were the largest SMEs (74%) and those in
the industry sector (69%) compared to just 54% of managers of micro-SMEs and
61% for the construction sector.
11
Among those SMEs expecting to grow in the next few years bank loans were clearly
the most preferred source (among 67%) of external financing. This was slightly higher
than the level seen for banks in 2009 and 2011 (both 63%). Bank loans were the
preferred choice in most EU countries (ranging from 50% to over 80%) except in
Cyprus and Romania, and by most different types of SME.
The second most popular option (but preferred by just 12%) were loans from other
sources such as trade credit, related companies, shareholders or public sources.
Only 6% preferred equity investment.
There was considerable variation in the amount of financing that SMEs would aim to
obtain. The highest proportion (32%) would aim to borrow from 100,000 up to 1
million, but 15% would aim to borrow considerably less (under 25,000), 24% for
25,000 to 99,999 and one in ten (11%) would look for significant loans of over 1
million.
The most likely perceived limiting factors to getting external funding to realise growth
plans among SMEs expecting to grow were insufficient collateral or guarantee (20%)
and interest rates or the price being too high (also 20%). In 2013 37% saw no
obstacle to getting this funding, slightly higher than in 2011 (35%).
Managers were most likely to see no barriers to external financing when the SMEs
were well established (more than ten years old). Interest rates were more likely to be
seen as a barrier by the smallest SMEs than larger firms.
When all SMEs were asked for their predictions as to whether the availability of
various types of financing would improve, worsen or stay unchanged over the next six
months, the majority of all firms able to give an opinion predicted no change for all the
various possible sources. Just over half (52%) of SME managers anticipated that the
availability of internal funds would remain unchanged. Slightly more expected that
there would be greater availability of internal funds (17%) rather than a decrease
(11%). This balance was very similar to 2011. Managers in the UK and Latvia were
the most positive about availability of internal funds, whilst the net balance of opinion
in Cyprus, Greece and France was that they would become less available.
About half of SME managers thought there would be no change in the availability of
bank loans (50%) or bank overdrafts/credit lines (52%). Similarly slightly more
thought availability of bank loans (14%) or bank overdrafts (11%) would increase
rather than decrease (11% for loans, 9% for overdrafts). The net balance of opinion
for both types has shifted from being slightly negative in 2011 to slightly positive in
2013.
Managers were most optimistic about the availability of bank loans in Latvia and most
pessimistic with the net balance of opinion that they would become less available in
Cyprus and Slovenia. Pessimism about availability was much lower in 2013 than
2011 in Greece and Portugal.
12
The availability of equity investment was also most likely to be predicted to remain
stable (21%) rather than increase (4%) or decrease (2%) by managers able to give
an opinion. A similar balance was seen for views on other sources of funding (38% no
change, 8% increase, 4% decrease).
This was closely followed in strength of importance by tax incentives (6.6) and then
by guarantees for loans (5.8) and business support services (5.7). The overall mean
scores and relative importance of the top four mechanisms is virtually the same as in
2011.
Measures to facilitate equity investments (4.0) and export credits or guarantees (3.2)
were of rather less importance in the overall view of EU managers, as seen in 2011.
Overall, well over half (57%) of EU SMEs had introduced at least one type of
innovation (to products, services, production methods, sales or management) over
the past 12 months in the way they ran their business. This is unchanged from the
level of innovation seen in 2011 which was also 57%. Innovation was most likely in
Malta (74%) and Finland (72%), but clearly lowest in Estonia (35%).
Just over half of EU SMEs (51%) reported that their turnover had grown in the last
three years, 38% growing by up to 20% per year and 13% growing over 20% per
year. However, one in four (24%) said that their turnover had declined. The levels of
rapid growth (over 20% per year) reported have gradually declined since 2009. Rapid
growth in turnover was most likely in Bulgaria, Poland and Lithuania whilst SMEs in
Greece (48%) and Spain (47%) were the most likely to have falling turnover levels.
Over a third (36%) of EU SMEs have grown in staff numbers (full and part time) over
the last three years which is very similar to 2011 levels (37%). Lithuania, Romania
and Bulgaria had the highest levels of strong growth in employee numbers but there
were high levels reporting falling numbers in Spain (41%) and Greece (35%). The
construction sector was the most likely to report falling numbers. SMEs were twice as
likely as LSEs to report stable employee numbers, and the smallest SMEs were the
least likely to report any growth in employee numbers.
13
High levels of EU SMEs reported that their labour costs and other costs (such as
materials and energy) had increased in the past six months, with net increase figures
(those reporting an increase less those who have seen a decrease) of +43% and
+60% respectively. Net interest expenses, however, have not risen so widely (net
increase level of +16%). Labour cost increases were most likely in France (+67%)
and Malta (+63%). They decreased only in Cyprus (-38%). Other costs rose in all
countries, especially in the UK (+78%) and Ireland (+75%).
Only slightly more SMEs reported that turnover had increased (35%) rather than
decreased (32%), i.e. net increase balance of +3%. This has fallen markedly since
2011 when there was a net increase of +12%. LSEs were much more positive (+29%)
about turnover than SMEs overall, as were the largest SMEs and those in the
industrial sector. The UK (+29%), Sweden, Germany and Denmark (all +26%) were
the most positive countries about turnover whilst Cyprus (-61%), Italy (-29% and
Spain (-26%) were the most negative.
There were net decreases for both profit (-17% net balance) and profit margin (-27%)
for EU SMEs, very similar to the 2011 results. Over two-fifths reported that each of
these had decreased in the last 6 months. The only marked improvements in profit
were reported in Denmark (+19% net balance) and Sweden (+11%). The biggest
negative net balances were reported by Italian and Cypriot SME managers. Denmark
and Sweden were also the only countries to report a positive net balance for profit
margin, i.e. the only countries where more SMEs reported profit margins have risen
rather than fallen. Decreased profit margins were most likely in Cyprus, Greece, Italy
and Spain.
14
15
Access to Finance
2013
2011
2009
40%
45%
35%
32%
40%
20%
8%
10%
8%
8%
15%
16%
14%
13%
11%
20%
9%
9%
9%
8%
7%
6%
25%
23%
23%
22%
20%
20%
20%
19%
18%
18%
17%
16%
15%
15%
15%
15%
15%
15%
12%
12%
11%
10%
30%
ME
TR
MK
RS
IS
IL
AL
NO
LI 2%
0%
CY
EL
ES
HR
SI
IT
IE
NL
PT
LT
SK
HU
BG
EU
UK
RO
DK
FR
LV
FI
BE
MT
CZ
SE
EE
PL
DE
AT
LU
5%
16
was cited by between 13% and 14% of companies with turnover between 2 million and 50
million.
The figures differentiated by level of innovation as well, with 17% of innovator SMEs
(introduced a new product or practice in the last 12 months) reporting it as the most pressing
problem whilst it was only 13% for the non-innovators. There was also a significant
difference between SMEs in terms of level of growth. Gazelles were most likely to report
access to finance as their most pressing problem (23%) while high-growth (18%) and
medium growth SMEs (12%) were less likely to do so.
2013
Finding customers
19
Access to finance
Competition
13
12
5
7
Other
20
14
15
15
14
22
24
14
14
Regulation
2009
15
15
10
2011
10
10
0
1
3
DK/NA
0
10
25
% 30
17
Don't know
100%
13%
5%
19%
14%
16% 19%
90%
80%
11%
17%
19% 14%
15% 15%
20%
22% 23%
22%
18% 16%
27%
17% 26%
29%
28%
20%
31%
31%
32%
28%
37%
10%
16%
14%
27%
20%
31%
13%
32%
29%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
42%
10%
26%
26%
20%
14%
20% 16% 15% 14%
13%
12% 10%
20%
18% 16% 14% 14% 13% 12%
9% 9% 8% 7% 6% 6%
10%
16%
5% 5% 3%
SK
EL
CY
LT
IT
ES
PL
HU
IE
SI
LV
RO
EU
PT
MT
BG
NL
FR
UK
HR
DK
DE
BE
AT
SE
LU
CZ
FI
EE
0%
28%
11%
15% 11%7% 7% 7% 6%
TR
IS
AL
ME
RS
IL
LI
NO
MK
20%
18
Internal financing was defined in the survey as Retained earnings or sales of assets. External
financing included various sources of financing, including grants/subsidised bank loans, bank
overdrafts, bank loans, trade credits, leasing/hire purchasing/factoring, debt securities, subordinated
loans and equity.
7
Note this includes a small number of respondents who could not answer the question.
19
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
10% 15%
12%
13%
16% 18%
18%
18%
23%
18%
20%
22%
21%
21%
22%
24%
27%
27%
27%
31%
32%
33%
33%
31%
35%
36%
40%
42%
28%
29% 20%
12%
12%
13%
31%
20%
15% 29% 23%
22%
11%
22%
30%
15%
22% 33%
20%
11% 25%
6%
16%
16%
18%
15%
26%
10%
15%
11%
17%
19%
20%
21%
26%
17%
31%
37%
20%
46%
14%
16%
12%
21%
30%
33%
21%
9%
40%
30% 44%
61%
51% 55%
51% 50%
41%
45%
20%
62%
62%
62%
57%
53% 54%
50%
51%
49%
45%
60%
67%
62%
58%
57%
58%
54%
49% 49%
41%
41%
65%
39%
38%
30%
68%
64%
55%
62%
50%
10%
AT
HU
SK
CY
ES
EE
PL
LU
DE
FI
BG
EU
IE
CZ
IT
NL
BE
SE
HR
RO
FR
UK
SI
EL
LV
LT
DK
MT
PT
6% 5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
7% 6% 4% 4% 3% 1% 1% 1%
0%
LI
ME
AL
IS
RS
NO
IL
MK
TR
9% 9% 8% 6%
0%
Q4. For each of the following sources of financing, could you please say whether you used
them during the past 6 months, did not use them but have experience with them, or did not
use them because this source of financing has never been relevant to your firm?
Base: All SMEs, % by country
The highest levels for relying on internal funds only were in Austria, Hungary and Slovakia
(8%+, i.e. twice the EU average). Avoidance of usage of any form of financing was especially
high among SMEs in Romania, Latvia and Portugal (36%-42%, i.e. almost twice the EU
average of 20%). Avoidance was also high outside the EU in Montenegro and Albania.
Avoidance of any use of financing was highest among the smallest EU SMEs, rising to 28%
among those with 1-9 employees compared to just 11% among the biggest SMEs with 50249 employees. Internal financing did not make up much of the difference, although it was
slightly higher (5%) among the smallest SMEs than those with 10+ employees (3%).
A similar pattern was also seen by turnover with SMEs of 2 million or less being the most
likely to manage without financing (23%) compared with the biggest (11% of those with a
turnover of more than 50 million).
Industrial SMEs were least likely to have managed without any form of financing over the last
six months (14%) and service providers the most likely (22%).
SMEs were more likely to have only used external financing (54%) than LSEs (43%), which
were more reliant on using both internal and external financing (47%).
20
Sources of financing
Internal funds were used as one of (or the only) source of financing by 26% of EU SMEs in
the previous six months. This is only slightly above 2011 levels (24% for the EU 27)
suggesting that the need for retained earnings and assets followed a rather stable trend.
Many other sources of financing continue to be widely used, as in 2011 - in particular, bank
overdrafts (39%, comparable to the 2011 level of 40%). Close behind were leasing/hire
purchase/factoring (35%, very close to 2011 level of 36%), trade credit (32%, the same as
2011 levels) and bank loans (32%, very close to 2011 level of 30%).
About one in seven (15%) SMEs used other loans from related companies, shareholders,
family or friends. One in eight (13%) had used grants or subsidised bank loans. Five per cent
had used equity and a few had used subordinated loans (2%) and debt securities issued
(2%).
Levels of use of other sources of finance were similar to 2011 levels, with only a small
increase in the level of bank loans (up from 30% in 2011 to 32% in 2013), retained earnings
(also up 2% from 2011) and other loans (up 2% from 2011). Use of equity was slightly lower,
down 2% from 2011.
Companies use of internal and external financing in the past six months
Used
DK / NA
Bank
overdraft,
or credit
cards
Bank overdraft,
credit
line orcredit
creditline
cards
overdraft
39%
21%
35%
Trade credit
32%
Bank loan
32%
or sale of funds)
assets
Retained earnings Retained
or sale ofearnings
assets (Internal
26%
15%
13%
55%
37%
1%
31%
19%
54%
17%
1%
67%
27%
1%
59%
Equity 5% 12%
1%
40%
13%
26%
Other loan
39%
1%
82%
1%
92%
1%
SubordinatedSubordinated
loans, participation
loans or similar
loans, participation
loans
2%5%
financing instruments
92%
1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Q4. For each of the following sources of financing, could you please say whether you used
them during the past 6 months, did not use them but have experience with them, or did not
use them because this source of financing has never been relevant to your firm?
Base: All SMEs, % EU-28
21
Leaving aside company characteristics for use of internal funds, debt securities and equity,
which will be analysed separately, grants or subsidised bank loans (used by 13% overall)
were more commonly used by larger SMEs, rising from 10% for micro SMEs (1-9
employees) to 18% for those with 50-249 employees and 19% for the industrial sector
businesses.
Bank overdrafts, credit lines or credit card overdrafts (39% overall) also rose with company
size (34% for micro SMEs to 43% for those with 10+ employees). They were least common
among service sector SMEs (36% compared to over 40% for all other sectors).
Usage of bank loans (excluding overdrafts) in the last six months (32% overall) was clearly
highest among the larger SMEs (42% for those with 50+ employees) compared with micro
SMEs (24%), and more likely by those in industry (37%) and construction (36%) than in
service providers (29%).
Trade credit usage (32% overall) also rose with company size (27% micro SMEs to 39% for
50+ employee firms). Unsurprisingly, it was also more commonly used by SMEs in
construction, industry and trade (+36%) than by service providing SMEs (27%).
Leasing, hire purchasing or factoring were half as likely to be used by micro SMEs (19%)
than those with 10+ employees (rising to 54% among those with 50+ employees) and
especially by industrial sector SMEs (42%).
Other loan types from related companies, family or friends (15% overall) also rose by size
(12% from micro SMEs to 22% for the largest businesses).
22
2011
2009
90%
80%
70%
60%
0%
40%
15%
15%
13%
25%
24%
24%
17%
31%
LI
NO
AL
IS
RS
TR
ME
IL
MK
10%
23%
22%
20%
20%
18%
18%
17%
16%
16%
16%
15%
13%
11%
7%
20%
33%
30%
30%
29%
29%
28%
27%
26%
26%
24%
23%
23%
30%
AT
DE
FI
IE
UK
LT
LU
HR
ES
HU
PL
EU
MT
IT
SE
SK
FR
BG
CZ
CY
RO
SI
EL
BE
EE
NL
DK
LV
PT
40%
40%
37%
35%
50%
Q4. For each of the following sources of financing, could you please say whether you used
them during the past 6 months, did not use them but have experience with them, or did not
use them because this source of financing has never been relevant to your firm?
Base: All SMEs,% by country
SMEs in Austria, Germany and Finland were the most likely to have used internal funds (over
a third), followed by a second tier group (Ireland, UK, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Croatia, Spain,
and Hungary) where 27% to 33% had done so, above the EU average. SMEs in Portugal
continue to be the least likely to have used internal funds (7%), followed by those in Latvia
(11%) and Denmark (13%).
Usage of internal financing was much higher in 2009 in nearly all countries. There was
considerably less difference between 2013 and 2011 levels with only a few exceptions.
Internal financing has fallen considerably among Finlands SMEs from 61% to 35% in 2013,
and also in Denmark, from 34% to only 13%. Usage has risen the most from 2011 levels in
Luxembourg (from 9% to 29%), France (from 14% to 22%) and Austria (from 32% to 40%).
Among non-EU countries, usage has risen markedly in Norway (17% to 31%) and
Liechtenstein (30% to 40%), although the latter result is based on just 50 interviews
When making comparisons with 2009, it should be noted that in the 2011 survey this
category was renamed from internal funds to retained earnings or sale of assets in the
questionnaire, but with an explanatory note in the script that this refers to internal funds like
cash or cash equivalent resulting from savings, retained earnings or sale of assets. The
23
likelihood of having used internal funds (i.e. retained earnings/sale of assets) rose with
company size from 20% among micro SMEs (1-9 employees) to 37% among those with 50249 employees and those with the biggest turnover (48% for more than 50 million). It was
also a little higher in the industrial sector (31%) than other sectors (varying between 25% and
26%).
SMEs that are owned by a single owner (male or female) were significantly less likely (22%
or less) to have used internal funds than SMEs which have shareholders (30%) or which are
family owned (28%) or owned by other firms or business associates (30%). This may in part
reflect the generally smaller size of the single owner SMEs.
There was also a significant difference in levels of usage of internal funds between SMEs
categorised as innovators (28%, i.e. that introduced a new product or practice in the last 12
months) versus non-innovators (23%). Similarly, there is a significant difference between
high growth SMEs (30%, i.e. firms who have grown at more than 20% per annum) versus
those that are not growing (22%) or are getting smaller (25%).
External sources (Country Variations)
Overall, 75% of EU SMEs used at least one form of debt financing (defined in the same way
as external financing but excluding debt securities and equity) in the past six months. This is
the same level as seen in 2011. There has been a marked increase in debt financing since
2011 in Greece, from 57% to 74% in 2013, bringing it into line with the EU average, and also
in Italy, rising from 76% to 82%. Levels have dropped a little in some countries but big falls
were seen in Estonia (from 85% to 62%) and Romania (from 78% to only 55%), followed by
Latvia (from 71% to 53%).
24
Companies that had used debt financing in the past six months
2011
2009
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
20%
61%
48%
41%
85%
79%
76%
75%
74%
71%
IS
IL
RS
NO
MK
TR
LI
ME
AL
30%
85%
85%
82%
81%
81%
78%
78%
77%
76%
75%
74%
74%
73%
73%
72%
71%
70%
68%
67%
65%
65%
64%
64%
64%
63%
62%
59%
55%
53%
40%
IE
UK
IT
MT
FI
FR
DE
DK
ES
EU
AT
EL
NL
BE
LT
PL
CY
LU
SE
SK
CZ
HR
BG
SI
PT
EE
HU
RO
LV
50%
10%
0%
Q4. For each of the following sources of financing, could you please say whether you used
them during the past 6 months, did not use them but have experience with them, or did not
use them because this source of financing has never been relevant to your firm?
Base: All SMEs, % by country
Of the EU countries, SMEs in Ireland remain the most likely to have used debt financing in
the last six months (85%). Debt financing was also relatively common in the UK (85%, now
matching levels in Ireland), Italy (82%), Malta (81%) and Finland (81%). It was least used in
Hungary (59%), Romania (55%) and Latvia (53%) after a big drop in levels used since 2011
in all three countries.
Debt financing was relatively less common among the smallest SMEs (67% of those with 1-9
employees compared to 80% or more where there were at least 10 employees) and those
with the lowest turnover (72% of those with 2 million or less compared with 84% for all
SMES with bigger turnovers). It was also less common among the newest SMEs (60% if they
were less than two years old) and those with only one owner (69% for a male owner and
63% for women owners).
25
Companies that had used equity financing in the past six months
Only 5% of EU SMEs had used equity financing in the last six months. It was nearly twice as
common among larger businesses (9% of those with 250+ employees) in the EU.
2009
45%
2013
50%
45%
40%
30%
29%
29%
26%
35%
30%
25%
20%
11%
10%
0%
0%
1%
1%
1%
5%
4%
3%
3%
3%
3%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
5%
5%
10%
9%
9%
9%
8%
8%
6%
6%
NO
IL
TR
AL
LI
IS
ME 1%
1%
RS
MK
0%
10%
5%
LT
LV
SE
FI
EL
DK
UK
MT
FR
IE
DE
LU
EU
BG
BE
IT
AT
NL
SI
CY
ES
PL
RO
CZ
SK
HU
EE
HR
PT
10%
16%
12%
15%
Q4. For each of the following sources of financing, could you please say whether you used
them during the past 6 months, did not use them but have experience with them, or did not
use them because this source of financing has never been relevant to your firm?
Base: All SMEs, % by country
Equity financing was the most common among SMEs in Lithuania (45%) and had even
increased since 2011 levels (38%). Well behind this level, but above average levels were
seen in Latvia (16%), Sweden (12%) and Finland (10%). It was very little used though in
Hungary, Estonia, Croatia and Portugal (all 1% or less). Levels have changed little since
2011 in most EU countries except Lithuania (up) and there has been a considerable drop in
Denmark (from 46% to 9%) and Sweden (from 31% to 12% in 2013).
26
21%
5%
21%
7%
16% 3%
Trade credit
14% 3%
0%
20%
50%
22%
2%
21%
2%
50%
41%
43%
40%
60%
35%
5%
36%
5%
80%
100%
Q7A. For each of the following ways of financing, could you please indicate
whether you: applied for them over the past 6 months; did not apply because
you thought you would be rejected; did not apply because you had sufficient
internal funds; or did not apply for other reasons?
Base: All SMEs, % EU-28
27
Types of external financing applied for in the past six months (% applying for
compared by year)
2013
2011
2009
21
19
26
16
Trade credit
15
11
14
10
8
0
10
15
20
25
30
%
Q7A. For each of the following ways of financing, could you please indicate
whether you: applied for them over the past 6 months; did not apply because
you thought you would be rejected; did not apply because you had sufficient
internal funds; or did not apply for other reasons?
Base: All SMEs, % EU-28
The proportion of SMEs in the EU applying for bank loans or trade credit in 2013 was similar
to 2011 levels, but application levels for other external financing has risen from 10% in 2011
to 14% in 2013.
28
Country variations
Bank loan
Applying for a bank loan (new or renewal)
Applied
DK/NA / No answer
100%
90%
1%
2%
13%
20%
20%
21%
1% 1% 2% 1%
1% 1%
17%
22%
27%
80%
16%
21%
37%
27%
22%
31%
38%
40%
10%
6%
17%
26%
10%
19%
18%
15%
37%
50%
48%
9%
40%
40%
37%
70%
50%
55%
45%
43%
43%
52%
40%
40%
34%
66%
58%
60%
50%
54%
40%
40%
30%
20%
10%
37%
63%
48%
59%
61%
1% 5%
9%
32%
30%30%
7% 8%
7% 6%
65%
49%
34%
33%
15%
68%
66%
65%
38%
2%
10%12%
33%
28%
63%
34%
36%
15%
0% 4% 1% 7% 5%
1%
6%
11%
4% 7%
15%
2% 4%
16%
11%
6% 6% 10%
27%
25%
23% 21%
26%
29%
24%
23%
4% 5%
20%
6%
17% 17%17%17%16%15% 15%15%
14% 12%12%
14% 14%
13%
8% 8%
5%
LU
SI
FR
IT
ES
LT
BE
MT
DE
AT
EU
HR
FI
PL
EL
NL
SK
PT
SE
CZ
CY
BG
HU
UK
RO
IE
DK
EE
LV
0%
28%
51%
44%
50%
34%
42%
36%
5% 7%
34%
20%
19%
1%
1% 3% 5%
18%
13%12%
10%
TR
IL
RS
MK
ME
AL
NO
LI
IS
60%
14%
17%
20%
20%
14%
31%
39%
44%
1%
3%
1%
6%
15%
18%
10%
15%
2% 2% 3% 1% 3%
1% 2% 1%
1% 1% 2%
1%
Q7A. For each of the following ways of financing, could you please indicate whether you:
applied for them over the past 6 months; did not apply because you thought you would be
rejected; did not apply because you had sufficient internal funds; or did not apply for other
reasons?
Base: All SMEs,% by country
Applications for bank loans were commonest in Luxembourg (32%), Slovenia (30%), and
France (30%) but rarest in Latvia (5%), Estonia (8%) and Denmark (8%). Not applying for
fear of rejection was again most likely in Cyprus (15%), Greece (15%) and Ireland (16%). In
Ireland and Cyprus, the level of those not applying because of possible rejection slightly
exceeded the level of those who applied, implying a considerable level of potential need
among the SMEs.
Outside the EU, SMEs in Turkey had the highest level of bank loan applications (42%) and
Iceland the lowest (10%).
29
Bank overdraft
Applying for a bank overdraft
Applied
DK/NA / No answer
17%
22%
19%
14%
24%
30%
35%
80%
14%
16%
13%
15%
16%
22%
2% 3% 2%
4% 3% 1% 3% 2% 1% 1% 1%
3% 2% 1% 1% 3%
17%
22%
23%
17%
28%
32%
30%
42%
55%
60%
40%
53%
61%
50%
50%
39%
40%
40%
4%
53%
65%
47%
48%
31%
36%
58%
75%
55%
37%
36%
12%
5% 8%
49%
74%
39%
45%
6%
62%
28%
58%
27%
6%
19%
10%
15%
6% 8%
3% 3% 0% 5%
10%
5%
1%
2%
39%
5% 6%
25%
9%
21%
21% 20%
18%
19%
17%
18%
12%
24%
26%
21%
1% 4%
20%
20%
19% 18%
17%
15%
13%
14% 14% 10% 9%
3% 4%
8% 5%
4% 4%
IT
SI
FR
LU
ES
SK
IE
EU
LT
DE
DK
AT
UK
MT
HU
RO
BG
PL
CZ
NL
CY
BE
PT
HR
FI
LV
EL
SE
EE
0%
35%
32%
27%
2%
17%
27%
58%
31%
7%
17%
9%
42%
50%
59%
4%
1%
10%
58%
67%
24%
6%
20%
21%
60%
47%
44%
30%
12%
54%
45%
12%
9%
15%
49%
48%
1%
1% 3%
34%
40%
70%
20%
24%
21%
48%
30%
4%
4%
2% 9%
36%
6%
32%
3%
19%
19%
22%
3%
10%
12%
9% 9%
2%
IS
IL
MK
RS
AL
TR
NO
LI
ME
90%
1%
2% 1%
100%
Q7A. For each of the following ways of financing, could you please indicate whether you:
applied for them over the past 6 months; did not apply because you thought you would be
rejected; did not apply because you had sufficient internal funds; or did not apply for other
reasons?
Base: All SMEs,% by country
Applications for bank overdrafts, credit lines or credit card overdrafts were commonest in
Italy (35%) and Slovenia (32%) and least common in Estonia (4%), Sweden (4%) and
Greece (5%). Not applying because of possible rejection (5% overall in the EU) was most
likely to have been a concern in Cyprus (15%), Greece (12%) and Ireland (12%).
Outside the EU, SMEs in Iceland were most likely to have applied for a bank overdraft (39%),
as opposed to a bank loan (see previous chart).
30
Trade credit
Applying for trade credit
Applied
DK/NA / No answer
100%
5% 3% 5% 2% 5% 4%
2% 2% 5% 3% 4% 4% 2%
1% 9% 1%
9% 10%
90%
80%
30%
22%
43%
19%
18%
33%
35%
8%
31%
34%
53%
70%
40%
26%
37%
44%
29%
9%
42%
49%
4%
9%
20%
18%
16%
36%
34%
46%
50%
1%
1%
1% 3%
8%
21%
22%
56%
36%
2% 3%
1%
9%
32%
40%
1%
25%
36%
33%
42%
44%
55%
19%
53%
12%
45%
60%
19%
23%
35%
66%
41%
44%
45%
6%
27%
2% 3% 11%
6%
20%
53%
48%
40%
30%
49%
43%
34%
30%
59%
31%
27%
47%
52%
51%
48%
2%
50%
54%
71%
49%
42%
53%
58%
37%
36%
5%
3%
3%
3% 5%
24%
22% 20%
6% 5% 3%
5% 2%
14%
23%
6%
2%
25%
20% 16%
1%
4%
5% 5% 6%
10%
9%
9%
8%
13%
8%
8%
9%
10%
8% 7% 6% 6% 5% 5% 5% 3% 2%
3% 2%
EL
IT
ES
CY
IE
UK
MT
FI
PL
EU
PT
LT
BG
RO
CZ
DK
AT
NL
SK
DE
FR
BE
LU
SE
HU
HR
SI
LV
EE
0%
37%
3%
28%
10%
12%
63%
46%
36%
53%
31%
26%
42%
40%
9%
3%
5%
12%
11%
14%
1% 6%
11%
6% 4% 4%
TR
IS
IL
RS
LI
MK
NO
AL
ME
50%
33%
38%
Q7A. For each of the following ways of financing, could you please indicate whether you:
applied for them over the past 6 months; did not apply because you thought you would be
rejected; did not apply because you had sufficient internal funds; or did not apply for other
reasons?
Base: All SMEs,% by country
Applications by SMEs for trade credit were especially high in Spain (28%), Italy (30%) and
Greece (34%) and lowest in Estonia (2%) and Latvia (3%), followed by Slovenia, Croatia and
Hungary (all at 5%).
Trade credit was particularly widely used outside the EU by SMEs in Turkey (31%).
31
Other sources
Applying for other external financing
Applied
DK/NA / No answer
90%
33%
35%
34%
80%
35%
36%
10%
13%
22%
30%
38%
29%
50%
12%
32%
25%
59%
58%
52%
48%
55%
18%
50%
38%
41%
40%
47%
55%
61%
43%
48%
50%
46%
62%
48%
53%
30%
51%
62%
44%
35%
40%
34%
33%
35%
26%
20%
3% 2% 2%
3% 4% 6% 4%
3% 4%
2% 2% 1%
13%
12%
13%
14%
1% 5% 1% 8%
11%
2% 3%
16%
2% 3% 4% 6%
9%
9%
13%
13%
10%
13%
11%
9%
7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 6% 6% 6%
11%
6% 6% 5% 1%
LU
DE
FR
AT
EU
SK
UK
FI
CZ
PL
LT
ES
HU
NL
BE
HR
DK
EE
PT
SE
SI
BG
MT
IE
IT
LV
RO
EL
CY
27%
25%
18%
53%
46%
32%
29%
44%
48%
54%
3%
61%
56%
62%
36%
1%
53%
30%
72%
69%
50%
55%
38%
0%
12%
62%
50%
10%
41%
55%
60%
20%
14%
27%
32%
24%
70%
1%
11%
19%
19%
19%
23%
40%
27%
33%
34%
17%
7%
5%
1% 1%
3% 3%
4%
2%
6%
9%
12%
24%
3% 5%
1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 5%
1% 2% 3% 1% 5% 2%
44%
8%
18%
19%
11%
9%
10%
9%
8%
4%
1%
6% 6% 5%
2% 2%
RS
LI
IL
NO
ME
IS
TR
AL
MK
100%
Q7A. For each of the following ways of financing, could you please indicate whether you:
applied for them over the past 6 months; did not apply because you thought you would be
rejected; did not apply because you had sufficient internal funds; or did not apply for other
reasons?
Base: All SMEs,% by country
Other external financing was most likely to be applied for in Germany (25%) and
Luxembourg (27%) and comparatively rarely used in Cyprus (1%), Greece (5%), Romania
(6%), Malta (6%), Italy (6%), Ireland (6%) and Latvia (6%).
Company characteristics
The levels of applications for bank/credit card overdrafts were almost as high in the smallest
SMEs (19%) as the largest (22% of those with 50+ employees), but micro SMEs were twice
as likely not to have applied for concern about possible rejection (7%) as the biggest SMEs
(only 3% concerned). Application levels were highest in the construction sector (25%), but
industry SMEs were not far behind (23%). Innovators were a little more likely to have
applied (24%) than non-innovators (18%). SMEs that were getting smaller were also more
likely to have applied (28%) than those which were stable or growing (20%). The application
level was highest where the SMEs were owned by venture capitalists/business angels (33%).
Applications for bank loans were clearly lower among micro SMEs (17%) than bigger firms
(27% for those with 50+ employees) and failure to apply because of concerns about rejection
were higher in the smallest (9%) and younger companies, with 11% of those active between
32
2 and 5 years not applying for a loan because of possible rejection. Application levels were
highest among medium sized SMEs by turnover (29% to 33% for 2 million to 50 million
firms) than among bigger firms (26%) or those under 2 million (21%). Growth levels of
SMEs (high, moderate or none) or whether the business was a gazelle made little
difference to application levels. Innovators (24%), on the other hand, had higher application
levels compared to non-innovators (18%).
Trade credit application levels were only slightly higher among bigger SMEs, but at least
20% for industry, trade and construction compared with 13% among service providers.
Applications for other forms of external finance were considerably higher among the largest
SMEs (21% of those with 50+ employees) than micro SMEs (8%) or those with under 2
million turnover (10%). They were also a little higher for the industrial sector (18%) than other
sectors.
33
62%
10%
65%
Trade credit
9%
67%
20%
7%
12%
40%
10% 3%
2%
13% 4%
12%
1% 3%
5%
4% 1%
4%
5% 6%
80%
0%
13%
60%
80%
100%
Q7B. If you applied and tried to negotiate for this type of financing over the past 6 months,
did you: receive all the financing you requested; receive only part of the financing you
requested; refuse to proceed because of unacceptable costs or terms and conditions; or
have you not received anything at all?
Base: All who applied for each type of financing in the past 6 months,% EU-28
About one in six (16%) of SMEs received less than the full loan they applied for and 2%
declined the offer because the loan cost was too high.
The proportion of SMEs applying and getting the full loan they requested has increased only
slightly since 2011 for bank overdrafts (from 61% to 62% in 2013) and bank loans (from 63%
to 65%). In the case of bank loans this is a smaller improvement than was seen between
2009 and 2011 (when the proportion getting the full bank loan requested rose from 59% to
63%).
Other external financing has continued to become even more available, increasing from 53%
in 2009 to 71% in 2011 and now up to 80% in 2013. However, there was a slight tightening of
trade credit, with the proportion getting everything falling from 69% in 2011 to 67% in 2013,
whilst the level getting most of what they applied for rising correspondingly by 2% to 12% in
2013.
34
Country variations
Please note that the outcome of the application question (Q7B) was a filtered question
asked only if the respondent had applied for that particular type of financing in the past 6
months. Thus, for some countries where sample size was very small, the results contain a
high margin of error and should be interpreted cautiously.
Bank loans
SMEs in Germany (87%), Finland (81%) and Austria (80%) were the most likely to be given
the full bank loan they requested. Countries where this was least likely to occur were the
Netherlands (32%) and Greece (33%), followed by Cyprus (41%) and Estonia (41%).
There was a considerable increase in full bank loan approval for SMEs in Ireland. In 2011
only 28% were granted the full loan but this rose to 64% in 2013, which was similar to the
approval rate in 2009 (68%). Other increased levels for getting the bank loan in full were
seen in the UK (48% in 2011 to 65% in 2013), Portugal (up from 49% to 60%), and Germany
(from 72% to 87%).
35
Outcome of the application for bank loan - Ranked by Applied and got everything
Applied and got everything
Applied but only got a limited part of it [between 1% and 74%]
Applied but was rejected
100%
90%
80%
3 2 4
3
1
3 5 6 5 4 4
4 2
5 9 3 5 5
5
8
9
9
10
11
11 9
13
15 13
17
8
11
13
14 18
13
23
16
15
17
8
5
2
7
23
17
14
14
7 1 4 1
5
9
13
4
28
1
24
12
5 4
3
1
7
7
5
7
6
6
7 7
2 3
5
13
4 9
6
31
14
8 4 9 4 17
10
31
11
4
5
13
15
4
11
2 10
10
10
6
4
2 7 15 5
5
2
70%
11
60%
14
8 14 12
9
87
40%
30%
81 80
70
64
60 59
56 53
52 52 50
20%
6 8 14 5
30
3 7
7
9
67 65 65 65
12
12 35
74 73 73 73 71 71
13
32
19
8
50%
1 2
3
3 7 6
9 1
14
7
7
21
22
20
14 14
9
3
3
46 46 45
9
8
41 41
87 86
78 75
68 68 66
64
40
33 32
10%
MK
LI
IS
RS
TR
IL
ME
NO
AL
DE
FI
AT
HR
PL
SI
LU
BE
FR
SE
DK
UK
HU
EU
IE
PT
CZ
MT
SK
IT
ES
LV
RO
BG
LT
EE
CY
EL
NL
0%
Q7B. If you applied and tried to negotiate for this type of financing over the past 6 months,
did you: receive all the financing you requested; receive only part of the financing you
requested; refuse to proceed because of unacceptable costs or terms and conditions; or
have you not received anything at all?
Base: All who applied a bank loan in the past 6 months, % by country
The graph below shows the same results from a different perspective, ranking all countries
by percentage of SMEs that did not get the full financing they had planned for. Across the
EU, 13 per cent of the applications were rejected and 16 per cent received less than they
applied for (9% who applied and got most of it, plus 7% who applied but only got a limited
part). In addition, 2% declined the loan offer from the bank because they found the conditions
unacceptable. These results suggest that in consequence about one third of SMEs (31%) did
not get the bank loan finance they had planned for.
36
Outcome of the application for bank loan - Ranked by all those who did not get the
financing they had planned for*
100%
8
13
90%
94 4
17
2 5 4
6 3 5
5
11
13
15
5 5 5
2
9
3
11 11
6 7
21
32 41
45
52 52
46
53
60 59
46 56
60%
65
50
65 67
64 68
73
64
65
71 73
50%
9
32
7 35
30%
10
41
70%
40%
70
66
40
81
68
75 78
86 87
73 74 87
6
12
7
3
80
8 9
12
4 14
19
11
11
13
14
8
17 13
8
9 5
30
14
12 8
7 2
5 4 7 2
7 5 5
4 6
4 10 1
2
5 15 6
10
8 10 8
2
5
4
3
CY
NL
EE
EL
LT
ES
IT
BG
SK
RO
MT
PT
CZ
LV
UK
EU
DK
IE
LU
HU
FR
BE
PL
SE
AT
FI
SI
HR
DE
2
4
7
4
6 15 4
20%
4
7
3 1 10 7
5
1
5
31
6
9
31
23 3 4
28
2 1
1
24
7
10% 23
18
17
17
17 16
15 13
14 13
13 14 14
12
11
7
3
0%
20 14
5
4
13
6 5
14
1 7
3
9
9
22
14
7
3
3
AL
NO
TR
ME
IL
RS
IS
LI
MK
80%
Q7B. If you applied and tried to negotiate for this type of financing over the past 6 months,
did you: receive all the financing you requested; receive only part of the financing you
requested; refuse to proceed because of unacceptable costs or terms and conditions; or
have you not received anything at all?
Base: All who applied a bank loan in the past 6 months, % by country
*Please note those who did not get the financing they had planned for was calculated by
adding the following answer codes: applied but rejected, applied but refused because cost
too high, applied but only got a limited part and applied and got most of it
The highest rejection rates were reported in the Netherlands and Greece where nearly a third
(31% in both countries) of SMEs had their applications rejected. They were followed by
Lithuania (24%) and Cyprus (23%).
Rejection levels rose in both Greece and the Netherlands from 22% in 2011 to 31% in 2013.
They have also markedly increased in Cyprus (from 14% to 23%) and Lithuania (from 12% to
24%) since 2011.
37
35%
35
30%
30
25%
25
20%
20
31
31
15
15%
24
23
18
10%
10
20
17 17 17 16
15 14 14 14
5
5%
14
12
13
13
13
11 10
8 8 7
10
9
5 4
3
7
4 3 3
NO
IL
RS
ME
AL
MK
TR
IS
LI
NL
EL
LT
CY
UK
EE
CZ
ES
IT
SK
HU
IE
DK
FR
RO
EU
LV
PT
PL
FI
SE
BE
BG
SI
AT
DE
MT
LU
HR
Q7B. If you applied and tried to negotiate for this type of financing over the past 6 months,
did you: receive all the financing you requested; receive only part of the financing you
requested; refuse to proceed because of unacceptable costs or terms and conditions; or
have you not received anything at all?
Base: All who applied a bank loan in the past 6 months, % by country
Bank overdrafts
Bank overdrafts were most likely to be given in full to SMEs applying in Croatia (100%),
Germany (86%), Poland (80%), Austria (79%), Slovenia (78%) and Slovakia (77%).
Countries where they were least likely to get everything wanted and most likely to be refused
were Cyprus (6% given loan but 32% refused), Greece (3% in full, 61% refused) and the
Netherlands (20% in full but 32% refused). These refusal rates have increased considerably
since 2011 in Cyprus from only 9% in 2011 to 32% in 2013, in Greece from 22% to 61%
and in the Netherlands from 21% to 32%.
Swedish SMEs had the highest level of all EU countries where the overdraft was refused
because the cost was too high (9%), followed by Lithuania (8%) and the Netherlands (8%).
Trade credit
German and Finnish SMEs were the most likely to have their request for trade credit to be
granted in full (87% and 88% respectively), followed by Luxembourg (84%) and Slovenia
(83%). Bulgaria showed a significant increase in having their request to be granted in full
38
(75%, up from 56% in 2011). However, SMEs in Cyprus (31%), the Netherlands (30%) and
Greece (38%) were the least likely to get all of the trade credit applied for. Availability of
trade credit had clearly worsened in Cyprus (down from 67% in 2011 given in full to only
31%) and the Netherlands (from 65% in 2011 to 30% in 2013).
Other sources
Financing from other sources was generally likely to be granted in full (80% for SMEs
applying across the EU) but especially likely in Luxembourg (100%), Austria (97%) and
Germany (96%). However, SMEs were least likely to get financing in full in Malta (19%),
Lithuania (29% in 2013, after a big fall from 2011 level of 72%) and Greece (34% in 2013,
down from 41% in 2011). Although the level was still relatively low, SMEs in Ireland were
more likely to have other financing granted in full in 2013 (51%) than in 2011 (36%).
39
Company characteristics
Bank loans
The oldest SMEs were the most likely to get all of any bank loan they had requested (68% of
those active for at least 10 years) compared to the youngest (50% of those active for under 5
years).
Construction companies were less likely to get bank loans in full (53%) than other sectors
(64% for service providers, 68% for trade and 70% for industry). Company size also played a
significant role. The smallest companies were less likely to be given a full loan (54%) while
the biggest SMEs with 50+ employees were significantly more likely to be given a full loan
(75%). Larger companies (LSEs) were also more likely (72%) to be given a full loan
compared to small and medium sized SMEs.
Particularly younger and smaller firms were more likely to get only some of the finance they
requested, and, indeed, to be rejected outright. The highest rejection rate was among the
micro companies employing fewer than 10 people (18%) and among SMEs active less than 2
years (28%), while for large enterprises (250 and more employees) only 3% of applications
were rejected.
Only 44% of gazelles applying received loans in full reflecting their youth (see above).
Innovative SMEs did better (61%) although still worse than non-innovators (70%). SMEs
exhibiting moderate growth had the highest level (76% loan in full), compared to high growth
SMEs (61%) or non-growing companies (also 61%). SMEs that were getting smaller were
also likely to be given a full loan (46%) and 25% had their application rejected.
Bank overdrafts
The oldest SMEs were also most likely to be granted a bank overdraft in full (over 60%
granted if the SME was at least 5 years old but only 29% for those less than 2 years old, with
a very high refusal rate of 43%). Construction companies were the least likely sector to be
given the full overdraft requested (53%) and industrial SMEs (67%) and trade companies
(66%) the most likely. Moderate growth SMEs were most likely to get an overdraft request in
full (72%), ahead of even high growth SMEs (59%). Company size was less of a factor with a
relatively small difference between the smallest and largest employers. (59% for smallest
companies, 66% for SMEs with 50 or more employees)
Trade credit
Levels of being granted trade credit requests in full were similar across most types of SME
compared to the EU average (67%). Only SMEs that were getting smaller were a little less
likely (56%) than stable (68%) or growing businesses (70%).
Other sources
As seen for bank loans, the longest established SMEs were the most likely to have other
sources of external finance provide the full loan requested (83% where they were active for
10+ years, but falling to 70% for 2 10 years and 63% if less than 2 years). Gazelles and
innovators therefore were less likely than other SMEs to be given full loans.
40
2011
2009
55%
44%
42%
50%
50%
60%
64%
63%
62%
59%
58%
58%
53%
53%
52%
50%
50%
50%
49%
47%
47%
46%
44%
42%
41%
41%
41%
40%
40%
39%
38%
70%
71%
71%
66%
80%
15%
30%
27%
31%
31%
28%
25%
40%
20%
Q12.
RS
TR
MK
IL
ME
NO
IS
LI
AL
0%
SI
FR
BE
ES
SK
IT
HR
BG
PL
LT
PT
EU
DE
MT
FI
CZ
SE
NL
EE
RO
LU
HU
UK
AT
IE
CY
LV
DK
EL
10%
What is the size of the last loan, of any kind, that your
firm has obtained in the last two years?
Base: All SMEs,% by country
Country variations
As can be seen above, SMEs in Slovenia, France and Belgium were the most likely to have
taken out a loan (all over 60%) but levels were well below the EU average in Cyprus (31%),
Latvia (31%), Denmark (28%) and Greece (25%). Outside the EU loans were especially
infrequent for Albania (only 15%) but very likely in Serbia (71%) and Turkey (also 71%).
In most countries, the level of SMEs taking out a loan in the last two years has not changed
greatly since 2011, with much less of a shift than was seen between 2009 and 2011. By far
the biggest change since 2011 occurred in Latvia (61% in 2011 falling to 31% in 2013) and
Greece (47% in 2011 falling to 25% in 2013).
41
Company characteristics
The likelihood of having taken out a loan in the last two years clearly rose with company size,
from 43% of micro SMEs (1-9 employees) to 59% among those with 50-249 employees. It
was also higher among industry and construction sector SMEs (both 57%) than among those
in trade or service sectors (both 48%). It was also higher among both SMEs experiencing
growth (53%) and those getting smaller (52%) than it was among stable companies showing
no growth (44%). Thus, the level among gazelles was similar and only slightly above
average (53% versus 50% for the EU average). Innovator SMEs were also more likely to
have taken out a loan (54%) than non-innovators (45%).
2013
2011
2009
22
23
24
30
32
35
18
33
29
12
12
12
0
10
Q12.
20
30
40
What is the size of the last loan, of any kind, that your
firm has obtained in the last two years? *
Base: All SMEs who obtained a loan in the last two years,% EU-28
*Please note that in 2013, the different categories of loan sizes asked have been amended to
split the category of 100,000 1 million into two sub categories, 100,000 249,000 euros
and 250,000 1 million. Therefore, the data for these two newly added categories do not
have back data from 2009 and 2011.
42
Country variations
SMEs in Malta (12% of all SMEs borrowers and non-borrowers) and the Netherlands (11%)
were the most likely to have taken out the biggest loans (over 1 million) and those in
Estonia (2%), Cyprus (3%), Greece (3%), Latvia (3%), Portugal (3%), and Romania (3%) the
least likely. The smallest loans were most common in Croatia (18% of all SMEs borrowing
less than 25,000), Poland (18%), followed by Slovakia (16%) and Bulgaria (also 16%).
There were mostly only small changes by country in levels of SMEs borrowing over 1
million between 2011 and 2013. The biggest changes were seen in Estonia (up from <0.5%
to 2% in 2013), Croatia (down from 7% to 4% in 2013), Latvia (down from 7% to 3%), and
Romania (down from 6% to 3%).
Company characteristics
The largest SMEs were most likely to have borrowed the most and taken out the biggest
loans 17% of all SMEs with 50+ employees borrowed over 1 million compared with just
4% of 10-49 employee businesses and 1% of micro SMEs. Industrial SMEs were twice as
likely to have borrowed over 1 million (10%) than construction, trade or service SMEs (all at
about 5% level). High growth SMEs were also more likely to take out these biggest loans
(8%) than companies that were not growing (4%) or even getting smaller (5%).
Larger companies (LSEs with over 250 employees) were much more likely to borrow bigger
sums than SMEs. Whilst 50% of SMEs did not take out a loan and only 6% borrowed over 1
million, among LSEs 37% did not take out a loan whilst 45% borrowed over 1 million. Only a
minority of LSEs took out smaller loans (16% borrowing 1 million or less).
1-9
employees
10-49
employees
50 249
employees
(1,253) %
18
25,000-99,999
(1,851) %
16
19
100,000-249,999
(1,350) %
12
12
250,000-1 million
(1,492) %
10
20
(988) %
17
Over 1 million
Q12.
What is the size of the last loan, of any kind, that your firm has obtained in the
last two years?
43
2011
2009
85
Bank
87
88
5
4
4
9
9
8
1
DK/NA/No answer
1
0
20
40
60
80
100
Company characteristics
Bank loans predominated to a similar extent among most types of SMEs except among
newer businesses where only 78% among those active for under 2 years and 74% for those
active for just 2-5 years stated bank as the provider of the last loan. Loans from private
individuals were commonest among the newer SMEs (13% of both those under 2 years old
and those active for 2-5 years compared with just 4% among SMEs active for 10 years or
more). Loans from other sources were more common among SMEs active for 2-5 years
(13%) than younger or older SMEs (about 8% for both groups).
Other sources were especially common among listed companies (25%). Gazelle SMEs
were more likely than average to have been loaned to by private individuals (12% compared
to the 5% EU average).
44
Country variations
Provider of the most recent loan
Bank
Private individual - family or friend
Other sources (e.g. microfinance institutions, government-related sources)
DK/NA / No answer
100%
90%
80%
70%
1%
1%
1%
1% 1%
1% 2%
1% 1%
2% 1%
1% 3%
3%
4%
6%
6%
3%
7%
1%
6%
5% 9%
7%
8%
8%
14%
9%
8%
1% 3%
11%
9%
6% 9%
1% 2% 3% 2%
16% 14% 12% 13%
22% 15%
3% 3% 3% 5% 3%
18%
3% 6% 6% 5% 7%
18%
27% 19%
1% 7% 8%
9% 12%11%
7%
24%
13%
6% 10%
1%
1%
4%
2% 6%
11%
1%
12% 23%
3% 10% 12%
11%
24%
1% 5%
3%
16%
60%
50%
93% 92%
98%
84% 79% 78% 77% 74% 67%
91% 89% 89%
87% 85%
61%
96%
93% 91%
89% 89% 89%
85% 85% 83% 78%
77% 76% 67% 66%
92%
96%
89%
90%
84%
88%
73%
83%
61%
40%
30%
20%
10%
TR
IL
RS
ME
IS
MK
AL
NO
LI
LU
EL
HR
FR
CY
MT
IT
AT
PT
BE
ES
SK
PL
DE
SI
EU
IE
HU
FI
LT
EE
BG
CZ
RO
SE
DK
UK
LV
NL
0%
45
Private
individual
family or
friend
Other
sources
(1,253) %
80
10
10
25,000-99,999
(1,851) %
87
100,000-249,999
(1,350) %
89
250,000-1 million
(1,492) %
89
(988) %
86
12
Over 1 million
Q12.
What is the size of the last loan, of any kind, that your firm has obtained in the
last two years?
Q13. Who provided you with this last loan?
N.B. excludes DK/NA
46
Working capital
12
13
10
Other
4
5
4
4
5
2
3
3
DK/NA
2009
44
44
43
43
46
45
Staff training
2011
2
3
2
0
1
0
10
20
30
40
50
47
Country variations
There were some considerable differences by country in the balance of these various
reasons.
Loans taken out for research & design were above the EU average in Austria (8%) and
Croatia (8%). Loans for promotion were rare everywhere, but slightly more common in
Slovakia (8%), Austria (6%) and Romania (5%).
Last loan was used for working capital
2011
2009
19%
15%
29%
46%
37%
17%
20%
55%
53%
61%
55%
28%
20%
30%
43%
41%
40%
39%
35%
34%
28%
40%
43%
50%
53%
52%
52%
47%
46%
46%
45%
45%
43%
60%
61%
60%
70%
59%
58%
57%
55%
53%
53%
80%
73%
90%
ME
TR
IS
MK
AL
RS
NO
IL
LI
0%
CY
LT
MT
EL
IT
BG
ES
CZ
PL
PT
SK
HU
DK
SI
NL
EE
RO
EU
IE
LV
DE
HR
LU
UK
FI
AT
BE
FR
SE
10%
48
2011
2009
16%
27%
26%
34%
34%
41%
41%
58%
28%
32%
20%
27%
25%
23%
65%
30%
30%
29%
36%
36%
32%
39%
38%
37%
37%
40%
54%
53%
51%
47%
47%
45%
44%
42%
42%
50%
56%
56%
55%
60%
58%
58%
70%
74%
80%
LI
NO
MK
RS
IL
TR
AL
ME
IS
0%
FR
SI
LU
UK
AT
BE
DE
SE
FI
EE
IE
LV
EU
CZ
DK
BG
SK
PL
HR
HU
EL
IT
PT
LT
MT
ES
RO
NL
CY
10%
49
Company characteristics
There was no correlation between SME size (by employees or turnover) and the likelihood of
using the loan for working capital. However, service sector SMEs were the least likely (38%)
to, compared with 47%-51% in other sectors. Growth or the lack of it was the other main
factor involved. SMEs that were not growing (49%) or getting smaller (53%) were clearly
more likely to use the loan as working capital than SMEs which were growing (under 40%).
Trade sector SMEs were the least likely to use the loan for land/building/equipment or
vehicles (34%) compared to over 40% for all other sector types. Not surprisingly growth
levels were clearly involved, with shrinking SMEs least likely to use the loan for this (31%)
and growing SMEs the most likely (50%).
The table below shows that the balance between the purposes of working capital and land,
buildings and equipment was similar for all sizes of the loan, although with the ratio slightly
more in favour towards land/building/equipment/vehicles than working capital for loans of
250,000 or more.
The ratios between the purposes of the loan are very similar to those seen in 2011 up to
250,000. In 2013 slightly fewer loans of 250,000 or more were used for working capital,
leading to a slightly greater emphasis on loans for land/building/equipment/vehicles
described above.
Purpose of loan vs. the size of the loan
Working
capital
Land/buildings
or equipment/
vehicles
(1,253) %
44
43
25,000-99,999
(1,851) %
46
43
100,000-249,999
(1,350) %
45
42
250,000-1 million
(1,492) %
41
45
(988) %
40
45
Over 1 million
Q12.
What is the size of the last loan that your firm has obtained in the last two
years?
Q14. What did you use this last loan for?
50
51
2011
2009
-30
-56
-18
-13
-20
-18
-11
-14
-25
-4
-7
-10
-1
-3
-6
-28
-6
8
5
-10
11
9
-5
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
10
20
Q11: For each of the following factors, would you say that they have improved, remained
unchanged or deteriorated over the past 6 months?
Base: % All EU-28 SMEs
The most optimistic viewpoint about the economic outlook was seen in Turkey (net level of
+21%), Iceland (19%) and Denmark (16%). The view point of all three countries improved
compared to the 2011 and 2009 surveys with the net change in economic outlook in
Denmark turning from negative to positive. The balance of opinion was also slightly more
positive than negative in Latvia (7%), the UK (7%), Sweden (5%) and Germany (5%).
The strongest balance of opinion that the outlook had deteriorated in the past 6 months was
seen in Serbia (-51%), Slovenia (-50%), Cyprus (-48%) and France (-46%).
The net results have either improved or stayed approximately the same for the majority of
countries since the 2011 survey, except for Cyprus (net decrease from 2011 of - 41%), Latvia
(-28%), FYROM (-24%), Lithuania (-23%), Finland (-19%), Norway (-14%), Italy (-10%),
Israel (-9%), the Czech Republic (-8%), France (-5%), Luxembourg (-4%) and Slovakia (3%).
52
2011
2009
60%
8%
16%
-40%
-60%
-51%
-20%
-3%
-12%
-14%
-17%
-17%
-18%
-18%
-19%
-19%
-21%
-24%
-26%
-28%
-29%
-29%
-31%
-33%
-37%
-39%
-46%
-48%
-50%
0%
-1%
-12%
-19%
-28%
2%
7%
7%
5%
5%
1%
1%
20%
21%
19%
40%
TR
IS
NO
IL
AL
MK
LI
ME
RS
-100%
DK
LV
UK
SE
DE
LT
EE
IE
AT
RO
PL
SK
MT
EU
BE
PT
HR
HU
CZ
NL
LU
EL
ES
BG
IT
FI
FR
CY
SI
-80%
Overall, SMEs were a little more likely to be optimistic about their own firm-specific outlook
with respect to sales and profitability over the last 6 months compared to the general
economic outlook. The EU average for those who judged that their firm-specific outlook
improved in the past 6 months was 22% while it was only 16% for the general economic
outlook. Similarly, only one in five (22%) said their firm-specific outlook had deteriorated,
compared to one in three (34%) for the general economic outlook. Overall the net balance of
opinion for EU SMEs was neutral at 0%.
Overall, SMEs were most optimistic in Turkey (net balance +29%), Denmark (+26%) and
Liechtenstein (+24%). Within the EU, the UK (+20%) and Germany (+16%) followed
Denmark. Outside the EU, Iceland (+21%) and FYROM (+20%) followed Turkey and
Liechtenstein. The biggest negative balance of opinion about their firms outlook was in
Cyprus (-45%) and France (-23%).
SMEs in the EU were more pessimistic in 2011 with a net change (% improved - %
deteriorated) in outlook of -6%. In 2013, the balance of optimism and pessimism is exactly
0%. SMEs in Romania showed the most positive change in net improved score (+1% in 2013
vs. -38% in 2011 survey). The other countries whose net improved scores improved by 20
points or more were Iceland (+21% from -7%), Malta (+1% from -23%), Hungary (-6% from -
53
30%), Portugal (-7% from -30%), Liechtenstein (+24% from 0%), Estonia (+1% from -21%)
and the UK (+20% from 0%). However, managers had become even more pessimistic on
balance since 2011 in France (net balance falling from -11% to -23%) and Cyprus (from -6%
to -45%).
Net change in firm-specific outlook in past 6 months
2011
2009
29%
1%
24%
21%
20%
18%
6%
20%
14%
13%
12%
12%
11%
11%
7%
4%
3%
1%
1%
1%
40%
26%
20%
16%
60%
-80%
DK
UK
DE
SE
BG
LT
SK
IE
LV
AT
PL
FI
EE
RO
MT
LU
EU
NL
BE
HR
HU
PT
CZ
IT
SI
EL
ES
FR
CY
-60%
TR
LI
IS
MK
NO
IL
AL
RS
ME
-45%
-40%
0%
0%
-4%
-4%
-5%
-6%
-7%
-7%
-11%
-15%
-16%
-17%
-23%
-20%
-5%
-7%
0%
54
The most positive net balance of opinion about firms capital was in Norway (+40%),
Denmark (+37%) and Germany (+30%), with SMEs in Cyprus (-25%) and Greece (-18%) the
most negative.
Net change in firms own capital in past 6 months
2011
2009
40%
19%
18%
15%
12%
9%
34%
31%
6%
-4%
10%
9%
9%
8%
8%
8%
8%
6%
6%
20%
23%
22%
21%
17%
17%
15%
14%
12%
10%
30%
37%
30%
26%
25%
40%
38%
50%
-5%
-10%
-12%
-13%
0%
-10%
-18%
-25%
-20%
-30%
NO
IS
TR
LI
RS
ME
MK
AL
IL
-50%
DK
DE
AT
SE
UK
FI
EE
LT
LU
PL
BE
HR
CZ
IE
NL
LV
RO
EU
MT
HU
BG
SK
PT
SI
IT
FR
ES
EL
CY
-40%
In 2013, the outlook on their firms own capital by EU SMEs became slightly more
optimistic with 19% of SMEs indicating the firms own capital deteriorated as opposed to 21%
in 2011 and 24% in 2009. This was also reflected in the net improvement score, which was
+8% for 2013 as opposed to +5% in 2011 and -10% in 2009. SMEs in Romania and Iceland
showed the biggest improvement in terms of net change in firms own capital with Romanias
score increasing from -42% in 2011 to +8% in 2013 and Icelands score increasing from
+17% in 2011 to +38% in 2013.
The overall balance of opinion among SMEs was that their firms own credit history was
nearly twice as likely to have improved over the past 6 months (23%) than deteriorated
(12%), with 59% unchanged. However, as with the outlook on their firms own capital, there
was considerable variation between countries, although the majority of the countries had a
positive net improvement score.
The highest level of improvement in credit history among EU SMEs was seen in Austria
(32%) and Denmark (32%), followed by the UK (31%). For non-EU countries, the highest
55
level of improvement was in Turkey (40%) followed by FYROM (31%). The lowest level of
improvement was in Cyprus (2%), followed by Greece (11%) and Romania (12%).
In terms of net balance of improvement and deterioration, Cyprus (-19%), Italy (-14%) and
Greece (-4%) had the lowest scores in 2013, followed by Spain (-1%) which was the only
other country to have a negative net improvement score. Germany (+27%), Estonia (+27%)
and the UK (+26%) had the most positive net balance in the EU, exceeded only by Turkey
(36%) and FYROM (30%) outside the EU.
In 2013, the net improvement score across the EU increased only slightly compared to 2011
(11% vs. 9%).
As with the net change in firms own capital, SMEs in Romania showed the biggest
improvement in terms of net change in their own credit history (-46% in 2011 vs. +1% in
2013). It was followed by Estonia (+4% in 2011 vs. +27% in 2013) and Croatia (-6% in 2011
vs. 16% in 2013).
2011
2009
36%
30%
50%
22%
22%
19%
16%
3%
-1%
0%
11%
8%
17%
17%
16%
16%
14%
13%
13%
13%
12%
12%
11%
11%
11%
9%
8%
5%
1%
10%
18%
20%
20%
19%
18%
30%
27%
27%
26%
24%
40%
-4%
-14%
-19%
-10%
-20%
-30%
TR
MK
NO
IS
LI
IL
AL
RS
ME
-50%
DE
EE
UK
AT
LT
DK
IE
LU
BE
SE
BG
HR
CZ
SI
HU
PL
FI
SK
EU
MT
NL
LV
FR
PT
RO
ES
EL
IT
CY
-40%
56
The majority of the SMEs were able to answer this question, although, 21 per cent said this
type of financing is not applicable to my firm. There were a number of countries where at
least one in three of the SMEs could not give an opinion and reported not applicable to my
firm: Romania (43%), Denmark (37%), Estonia (37%), Malta (34%), Slovakia (34%),
Germany (33%), Austria (32%), Liechtenstein (31%), Latvia (31%), Czech Republic (30%)
and Portugal (30%).
Across the EU, the highest levels of improved willingness of banks to lend were seen in
Bulgaria (33%) followed by Poland (23%) and Slovakia (23%). Across the non-EU countries,
the highest levels were seen in Turkey (62%) and FYROM (37%).
The three countries that showed the highest levels of banks willingness deteriorating were
Cyprus (60%), Greece (51%) and Slovenia (43%), all EU countries. Across the non-EU
countries, Albania reported the highest level of deterioration with 27%.
Although the overall trend in banks being less willing to provide a loan continued in 2013,
there was a slight decrease in the percentage of SMEs indicating banks willingness had
deteriorated in the past 6 months. For the EU countries, there was a two percentage point
decrease in the level of deterioration in 2013 (25%) compared to 2011 (27%) which was
reflected in a slight improvement in the net improvement score. (-11% in 2013 vs. -14% in
2011)
SMEs in Bulgaria (+23%) and Estonia (+14%) had the strongest net level for improved
willingness in the EU, and Turkey (+57%) outside the EU. Greece (-47%) and Cyprus (-60%)
had the lowest net scores.
In 2013, net levels of improved willingness of banks increased by five percentage points or
more compared to 2011 across 14 EU countries, including Portugal, Estonia, Spain, Malta,
Ireland, Hungary, UK, Romania, Luxembourg, Slovakia, Austria, Bulgaria, Germany and
Slovenia. On the other hand, Cyprus, Latvia, Finland, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium, Croatia
and Lithuania in the EU, and Albania, Norway, Liechtenstein, Serbia and Israel among the
non-EU countries saw their net levels of banks willingness drop by five points or more.
57
2011
2009
57%
70%
-30%
-50%
-70%
14%
21%
-3%
-16%
-10%
11%
3%
3%
0%
10%
TR
MK
IS
IL
ME
NO
AL
RS
LI
30%
BG
23%
14%
EE
13%
SK
12%
LT
10%
PL
9%
CZ
7%
MT
6%
DE
4%
SE
LV
4%
1%
UK
-2%
RO
-3%
LU
-3%
DK
-4%
HR
AT
-4%
HU
-7%
-8%
PT
-11%
EU
-12%
FI
-14%
IE
-19%
BE
-22%
FR
-23%
ES
-33%
SI
NL
-34%
-35%
IT
-47%
EL
CY -60%
50%
A considerable minority of SMEs in the EU (44%) could not give an opinion as to whether
access to public financial support had changed in the past 6 months since this was not
applicable to their firm. Among those EU SMEs who could make a judgement, they were four
times as likely to judge that it had deteriorated (17%) rather than improved (4%), whilst 29%
assessed it as unchanged. The overall net balance of opinion (improved minus deteriorated)
was that the situation has deteriorated (-13%), although this was higher than the overall net
balance in 2011 (-20%).
SMEs in Hungary were the most likely to think that access to public financial support had
improved in the past 6 months (11%) , followed by Croatia, Poland and Ireland (all at 8%). At
the other end of the scale, the countries which were the most likely to think public support
had deteriorated over the same period were Spain (40%), followed by Cyprus and France
(both 32%).
Among the EU SMEs, only Latvia (+3%), Estonia (+2%) and Malta (+1%) had a net balance
of opinion that was positive. Among the remaining EU countries, Spain (-36%) and Cyprus (31%) had the lowest net balance of opinion. Turkey was the only non-EU country to have a
positive net balance at 8% while Serbia (-28%) and Montenegro (-22%) had the lowest net
balance.
58
The balance of opinion in EU SMEs about access to public financial support in 2013 has
improved since the 2011 survey (4% improved minus 17% deteriorated, giving a net balance
of -13% compared with -20% in 2011).
2011
2009
8%
20%
-30%
-12%
-16%
-22%
-28%
-1%
-4%
-4%
-5%
-27%
-27%
-31%
-36%
-9%
-11%
-12%
-13%
-13%
-13%
-14%
-15%
-17%
-19%
-20%
-9%
-10%
-1%
-3%
-4%
-4%
-4%
-5%
-6%
-6%
-7%
-8%
0%
3%
2%
1%
0%
10%
-40%
TR
AL
NO
MK
IL
LI
IS
ME
RS
-60%
LV
EE
MT
DK
SE
DE
LU
LT
HU
UK
PL
BG
RO
AT
CZ
PT
FI
SK
EU
BE
HR
IE
IT
NL
EL
SI
FR
CY
ES
-50%
59
Serbia (19%), Montenegro (15%) and FYROM (15%) had the highest percentage of SMEs
reporting deterioration in the past 6 months.
Overall, the 2013 results were similar to those in the 2011 survey for the EU total, only
slightly more positive with a net balance of opinion at -4% in 2013 compared to -7% in 2011.
This was thanks to a three point decrease in the percentage of SMEs that reported
deterioration in 2013 (11%) compared to 2011 (14%).
Six EU countries saw a significant rise in levels of improved willingness of business partners
to provide credit from 2011 to 2013 (the UK, Ireland, Croatia, Portugal, Estonia and Spain).
Results have significantly worsened since 2011 in a few countries. In Cyprus in 2013, 38% of
SMEs reported willingness had deteriorated compared to 17% in the 2011 survey. In Italy,
16% reported deterioration in 2013 compared to 11% in 2011.
30%
2009
12%
15%
2011
-2%
-2%
-8%
-8%
-9%
-21%
-16%
-20%
-12%
-12%
-14%
-4%
-6%
-7%
-9%
-4%
-2%
-2%
-2%
-2%
-1%
-35%
-30%
-50%
LT
UK
LV
SE
PL
EE
IE
DE
CZ
AT
RO
BG
DK
MT
FI
HR
SK
LU
EU
BE
NL
PT
ES
SI
IT
FR
HU
EL
CY
-40%
TR
IS
AL
NO
ME
IL
MK
RS
LI
-10%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
5%
3%
2%
2%
2%
2%
1%
10%
4%
3%
10%
20%
2013
22%
Only 16% of EU SMEs were able to give an opinion about the willingness of investors to
invest in equity in the past 6 months, the great majority of SMEs considering this as not
applicable to their firm. Among those EU SMEs expressing an opinion, most reported no
60
change (12%), with two per cent reporting both an improvement and deterioration (overall net
balance of -1%). This was a small improvement on 2011 levels (-3%).
Lithuanian and UK SMEs had the highest net scores whilst Hungary and Cyprus had the
worst. However, as these country figures were based on very small numbers of interviews
with those able to give an opinion, they should be treated as indicative only.
Net change in willingness of investors to invest in equity in past 6 months
2011
2009
-8%
-1%
-3%
-5%
1%
0%
0%
6%
4%
-15%
-2%
-2%
-4%
-6%
-6%
-7%
-10%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-2%
-2%
-2%
0%
-1%
-5%
1%
1%
1%
1%
0%
0%
0%
2%
5%
4%
4%
15%
-25%
TR
NO
AL
IS
LI
RS
IL
ME
MK
-45%
LT
UK
LV
AT
DE
EE
SE
DK
CZ
FI
BG
EU
RO
BE
SK
IT
LU
PL
MT
HU
ES
IE
NL
PT
FR
EL
SI
HR
CY
-35%
61
Company characteristics
General economic outlook
The likelihood of reporting improvement in the general economic outlook in the past 6
months rose with company size from 12% among micro SMEs (1-9 employees) to 20%
among those with 50-249 employees and companies with 250+ employees reported the
highest percentage of improvement (25%).
There were no significant differences in terms of turnover among the SMEs and only a slight
difference across the different sectors, with industrial sector SMEs (17%) and service sector
SMEs (16%) more likely to report improvement in the past 6 months compared to those in
trade (14%)..
In terms of firm ownership, SMEs with shareholders and who are listed on the stock market
tended to have a more positive economic outlook compared to those with only one owner or
those owned by other firms or business associates.
62
63
Gazelles were more likely to report that banks willingness to lend had improved in the
past 6 months (23%) compared with moderate growth (16%) or stagnant SMEs (9%). This
differentiation between gazelles and non-gazelles was also seen when it came to
willingness of business partners to provide trade credit with 20% of gazelles reporting
improvement whilst only 7% to 14% of moderate or high growth SMEs reported an
improvement. Innovators were also more likely to report improvement in the past 6 months in
both banks willingness to lend (16% versus 12%) and in business partners willingness to
provide trade credit (9% versus 5%).
64
Remained unchanged
15
15
2013
Bank loans 2011
2009
15
15
2013
2011
2009
Not applicable
45
45
9
8
43
41
8
9
37
36
17
17
5
5
32
2
2
17
2
6
6
9
2013
2011
2009
8
47
46
35
4
78
74
67
2013 1 10 0
Debt securities issued 2011 2 13 1
2009 5
12 1
Other
29
32
37
24
2
3
DK/NA
86
81
77
38
35
21
7
3
20
47
51
6
61
40
60
Net
score
28
27
45
2013
Trade credit 2011
2009
Equity investments in your firm
Improved
80
3
4
-6%
-7%
4
5
7 3
-6%
-7%
-37%
3
4
5
-3%
-4%
-20%
2
3
5
0%
-1%
-7%
3
6
-1%
-2%
-4%
2
2
6
2%
0%
-6%
100
Q9 For each of the following ways of financing, would you say that their availability has
improved, remained unchanged or deteriorated for your firm over the past 6 months?
Base: All EU-28 SMEs
The majority opinion (43%) that the availability of bank loans had not changed remained
very similar to 2011 levels; as did the percentage of SMEs reporting improvement and
deterioration. The same trend also applied to the availability of bank overdrafts where the
percentage of SMEs who reported improvement in the past 6 months varied by one
percentage point (9% in 2013 versus 8% in 2011).
Opinions on the availability of trade credit also seemed stable as there was very little
change between 2011 and 2013 with respect to reported levels of improvement or
deterioration. The overall picture continued to be more positive compared to 2009 when one
in four SMEs (24%) had reported deterioration, as opposed to one in ten SMEs in 2011 and
2013 (8% in 2013 and 9% in 2011). The same trend was also reflected in those not able to
give an opinion due to trade credit not being applicable to their firm (47% in 2013 versus 46%
in 2011).
There was an increase in 2013 in the percentage of EU SMEs reporting not applicable to my
firm for both equity investment (78% vs. 74% in 2011 and 67% in 2009) and debt
securities (86% vs. 81% in 2011 and 77% in 2009). SMEs opinion as to whether the
availability of either type of financing had improved or deteriorated seems to have stabilised
as the figures remain very similar to the 2011 levels.
In 2013, a significantly smaller percentage of SMEs were not able to give an opinion on the
availability of other sources (47%) compared to 2011 (51%) and 2009 in particular (61%).
For those who were able to give an opinion, the reported levels of improvement and
deterioration remained the same compared to 2011 while the percentage of those who
indicated availability increased slightly from 35 per cent in 2011 to 38 per cent in 2013.
65
Country variations
It should be noted that sample sizes of some countries were relatively small and so results in
these cases should be treated with caution.
Across the 28 EU countries, only 9% of SMEs reported that it was easier to obtain a bank
loan in the past 6 months than it was before while 15% reported that it was more difficult,
making the net balance of opinion -6%.
Ten EU countries had a positive balance of opinion indicating a greater level of improvement
than deterioration. Bulgaria (+13%), Malta (+10%) and Lithuania (+8%) had the highest net
scores among EU SMEs. FYROM (+20%) and Turkey (+17%) had the most positive balance
of opinion across non-EU countries.
A further six EU countries still had a net improvement score that was higher than the EU
average of -6% while the remaining 12 countries fell below the EU average. Cyprus (-43%)
and Slovenia (-35%) were significantly more likely to report deterioration rather than
improvement over the past 6 months, followed by Greece (-25%) and Finland (-19%).
Opinions in Belgium were particularly disparate, as firms in Belgium reported one of the
highest levels of improvements in the availability of bank loans (13%) as well as one of the
highest levels of deterioration (22%).
Net change in availability of bank loans in past 6 months
2011
2009
6%
-2%
-7%
-8%
-10%
0%
-25%
-35%
-43%
-30%
-9%
-10%
-12%
-15%
-16%
-19%
-8%
-1%
-1%
-3%
-3%
-4%
-5%
-6%
-6%
-8%
-10%
13%
10%
8%
7%
4%
4%
4%
3%
3%
2%
10%
20%
17%
13%
30%
-50%
-70%
MK
TR
IS
IL
NO
AL
ME
LI
RS
BG
MT
LT
EE
SK
DE
HR
PL
LV
CZ
SE
PT
HU
UK
DK
RO
EU
ES
LU
AT
BE
IE
IT
FR
NL
FI
EL
SI
CY
-90%
Q9 For each of the following ways of financing, would you say that
their availability has improved, remained unchanged or deteriorated for
your firm over the past 6 months? Bank loans
Base: All SMEs, % by country
66
A rather similar picture was revealed when looking at results on the availability of trade credit
by country, with the largest net improvement scores seen in Lithuania (+7%) and Bulgaria
(+7%) and the lowest net improvement scores seen in Greece (-26%) and Cyprus (-23%).
There was however less variation between countries in terms of the availability of trade credit
in the past 6 months compared to bank loans.
Company characteristics
Bank loans and trade credit
The overall EU level of one in ten (9%) SMEs who answered that the availability of bank
loans had improved in the past 6 months varied slightly by company size. Medium and large
SMEs (11%) were more likely to report improvement in availability of bank loans compared to
micro SMEs (7%). LSEs companies with more than 250 employees were even more
optimistic, with 15% believing that the availability of bank loans would improve.
With respect to company turnover, SMEs with a turnover greater than 50 million were more
likely than firms with lower turnover to report an improvement in the availability of bank loans
(17%, compared to between 9% and 10% for lower turnover companies). A deterioration in
the availability of bank loans was more likely to be reported by construction (18%) and
service sector SMEs (16%) than industry SMEs (12%).
The availability of trade credit varied less than that of bank loans when it came to different
company sizes. Large SMEs (50-250 employees) were more likely to report improvement
(6%) compared to micro SMEs (4%), but only by two percentage points.
While innovators were more likely to report improvement in the availability of bank loans
(10%) compared to non-innovators (7%), they were also more likely to report higher levels of
deterioration (17% versus 11% for non-innovators). This made the overall balance of opinion
more negative for innovators in terms of bank loan availability.
The picture was rather similar when gazelles were considered. While they were more likely to
report improvement (15%) compared to moderate growth SMEs (10%), they were also more
likely to report higher levels of deterioration (17% versus 11% for moderate growth SMEs).
Looking at the availability of trade credit by innovators revealed the same pattern. Despite
being more likely to report improvement compared to non-innovators, both groups had the
same net change score (-3%) due to a higher level of deterioration reported by innovators.
This pattern was broken when it came to gazelles versus non-gazelles with the former having
a higher net availability of trade credit score (+7%) compared to moderate (-2%) or high
growth SMEs (+1%), or SMEs with no growth (-4%).
Equity investments, debit securities, bank overdrafts and other sources
Just over one fifth of EU SMEs (21%) were able to give a judgement about the availability of
equity investments in the past 6 months. The ratio of those able to give an opinion was the
lowest for micro SMEs (-20%) and became higher with company size. One quarter (24% to
26%) of larger SMEs and one third (34%) of LSEs felt able to provide an answer.
In terms of levels of improvement or deterioration, there were no clear differences in terms of
the sector SMEs operated in or the company size by turnover. However, there was a clear
difference in terms of ownership of SMEs, and a slight difference in terms of how long the
SME had been active. Availability was most likely to have improved for SMEs owned by
shareholders (6%) versus SMEs which had a family owner or a single owner (1%-2%).
There was only single percentage point difference between innovators (2%) and noninnovators (1%) in terms of those who reported improvement in the availability of equity
67
investments. Gazelles, on the other hand, were clearly the most likely to report improvement
(7%) compared to non-gazelles (moderate growth 2%, no growth 1%).
There were no differences by company size, sector or turnover across the EU SMEs when it
came to being able to give an opinion on the availability of debt securities. However, SMEs
who were active for 10 years or more were more likely to find debt securities inapplicable for
their companies (87%) compared to younger SMEs (varying between 75% and 83%).
There were also no significant differences for levels of improvement and deterioration by
size, sector or turnover. SMEs with shareholders were only slightly more likely to report
improvement in the availability of debt securities (2%) compared to other types of ownership
(0%). Similarly, gazelles were only slightly more likely to report improvement (2%) compared
to non-gazelles (0%).
As to variations in availability of other sources, those who were able to given an opinion
were most likely to be large SMEs (61%), those operating in the industry sector (60%), firms
with a turnover between 2 million and 10 million (60%), and finally those active for less
than two years (62%). With respect to net level of availability, there were no significant
differences in the majority of the company variables (size, turnover, ownership).
Even if innovators seemed to report improvement (9%) more than non-innovators (5%), they
were also more likely to report deterioration (7% versus 4%). Gazelles, on the other hand,
did differentiate from the majority of the non-gazelles both in terms of reported levels of
improvement (13% for gazelles versus 11% to 5% for non-gazelles) and in terms of overall
net score (+8% versus +1% to -5%).
68
Remained unchanged
Increased
11
10
42
43
18
19
2013
Bank loans 2011
2009
12
12
8
43
42
48
16
15
17
6
5
6
2013
Trade credit 2011
2009
Equity investments in your firm
2013
2011
2009
2013
Debt securities issued 2011
2009
Other
2013
2011
2009
2
2
3
38
40
43
22
23
33
57
6
5
2
0
81
81
69
33
30
44
20
40
51
56
44
5
60
8%
9%
4%
4%
9%
4%
5%
3%
1
1
73
71
15 1
1 16
1
2
24
28
31
22
46
45
38
Net
score
29
28
10
10
2
3
DK
0%
1%
1%
1
1
4
-1%
0%
-1%
4%
4%
3%
5
80
100
Q5 For each of the following types of external financing, please tell me if your needs
increased, remained unchanged or decreased over the past 6 months?
Base: All EU-28 SMEs
Looking at the overall results across the EU, the need for external financing seemed to stay
stable for the majority of the different types of financing, except for very minor changes. For
bank overdraft or credit, one in five SMEs reported an increased need (18%) while one in ten
reported a decreased need (11%), making the net change +8%. This was very similar to the
net change in 2011 which was +9%.
The net need for bank loan stayed exactly the same while for trade credit, it decreased by
one percentage point. (+4% in 2013 versus +5% in 2011) However, there was also a slight
decrease in the percentage of SMEs indicating the need for trade credit had stayed
unchanged compared to 2011 (38% in 2013 versus 40% in 2011).
There was a similar situation of stability with the need for equity investment and debt
securities whereby the net need for both decreased by one percentage point. (0% and -1%
respectively) The net need for other financing remained stable in 2013 compared to 2011
(both at +4%). In 2013, there were likely to be more SMEs who investigated this type of
financing for their needs with a 5% decrease in the percentage of SMEs who said not
applicable for other financing. (51% in 2013 versus 56% in 2013)
69
Country variations
The SMEs in majority of the countries considered the question of the need for bank loans as
relevant to their companys situation. However, in Romania (67%), Estonia (65%) and
Hungary (59%), at least six in ten SMEs indicated they were not able to give an opinion.
Across the EU SMEs, the highest levels of increased need were in Cyprus (29%), followed
by Greece (26%) and France (22%). The biggest rise in the need for bank loans since the
2011 survey, however, was seen in the Netherlands (12% in 2011 to 20% in 2013).
Netherlands was then followed by Cyprus and Luxembourg (12% in 2013) both showing a
rise of six percentage points compared to 2011.
The highest levels of decreased need, on the other hand, were in Finland (23%), Slovenia
(19%) and Austria (18%). SMEs in the majority of countries were more likely to have reported
no change in the need for bank loans rather than an increase or decrease.
The EU average level for increased need for bank loans was 16% while the average for
decreased need was 12%, making net change across the EU +4%. The EU average for net
change stayed stable since 2011. Cyprus showed the highest net score of an EU country
(+26%), followed by Greece (+15%).
2009
26%
2013
30%
25%
-15%
14%
10%
7%
7%
5%
2%
1%
1%
2%
2%
1%
-3%
-10%
TR
ME
RS
IS
AL
IL
MK
LI
NO
-5%
1%
0%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-2%
-3%
-4%
-4%
-5%
-6%
-6%
-7%
0%
5%
5%
4%
4%
3%
5%
9%
8%
10%
CY
EL
IT
BG
FR
LT
HU
IE
ES
EU
NL
CZ
LV
UK
DK
DE
LU
SE
BE
RO
SK
HR
PL
MT
EE
PT
SI
AT
FI
15%
15%
12%
12%
20%
Q5 For each of the following types of external financing, please tell me if your needs
increased, remained unchanged or decreased over the past 6 months? Bank loans
Base: All SMEs, % by country
70
With regards to bank overdrafts, the greatest levels of increased need over the last six
months were reported from SMEs in Italy (31%), Cyprus (29%) and France (28%). This was
also reflected in net levels of change as these three countries also ranked the highest in net
change. (Cyprus +22%, Italy +21%, France +19%)
Similar to the need for bank loan, majority of the countries were more likely to report no
change rather than increased or decreased need for bank overdrafts. Over half of SMEs in
Ireland (60%), France, Belgium and Slovenia (all at 54%), Poland (52%) and Bulgaria (50%)
reported no change.
The EU average for net change in need for bank overdrafts stayed stable in 2013 (+8%)
compared to 2011 (+9%). Only six countries reported their need had decreased more than it
had increased. These were Luxembourg (-1%), Germany (-2%), the Czech Republic (-3%),
Austria (-3%), Sweden (-4%) and Estonia (-5%).
Looking EU SMEs need for trade credit from business partners, a majority of firms in half
of the EU countries (14) were not able to give an opinion on this type financing as it was not
applicable to them. Estonia had the highest percentage of managers reporting not applicable
(85%), followed by Austria (78%) and Germany (77%).
SMEs in Cyprus (25%), Ireland (23%) and Greece (22%) were most likely to report that their
companys need for trade credit had increased in the past six months. Across the non-EU
countries, Turkey reported the highest need (24%) followed by Israel (17%).
The EU average for net change in trade credit need stayed stable over the last three years.
In 2013, only two countries reported a negative net change score that was larger than -1%
(Luxembourg and Croatia both at -4%) suggesting their need for trade credit rather
decreased.
71
Net changes in need for trade credit from business partners in past 6 months
2011
2009
35%
30%
12%
12%
6%
2%
1%
1%
0%
5%
3%
2%
2%
1%
1%
0%
0%
10%
9%
6%
5%
5%
5%
4%
4%
15%
11%
10%
9%
20%
19%
16%
25%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-4%
-4%
-1%
-3%
IL
TR
AL
MK
ME
RS
LI
IS
NO
-5%
CY
IE
EL
IT
UK
LT
PL
ES
BG
DK
EU
NL
FR
HU
SI
MT
PT
SK
FI
AT
DE
LV
CZ
BE
EE
RO
SE
LU
HR
0%
-10%
-15%
Q5 For each of the following types of external financing, please tell me if your needs
increased, remained unchanged or decreased over the past 6 months? Trade credit
Base: All SMEs, % by country
In 23 of 28 EU countries, half or more of the SME managers were not able to give an opinion
on the need for equity investment. The EU average for SMEs answering questions about
equity investment was 28%, which was similar to the 2011 level of 29% but much lower than
the 2009 level of 44%.
The majority of SMEs who gave an opinion reported that the level of need for this type of
financing had not changed in the past six months. The biggest levels of increased need were
seen in Lithuania (15%) and Greece (10%), both of which slightly increased compared to
2011 levels. These were also the two countries that had the highest positive net change,
indicating their need increased more than it decreased (+12% and +6% respectively). They
were followed by Denmark (+5%) and Bulgaria (+4%).
In terms of change in levels of increased need compared to 2011 SMEs in Denmark showed
the most significant change, with a 17 percentage point decrease in their need for equity
financing in 2013 compared to 2011 (7% in 2013 versus 23% in 2011). Sweden showed the
second most significant decrease in its need for equity financing compared to 2011 (16% in
2013 versus 3% in 2011).
The EU average for net change remained the same between 2009 and 2013, varying
between 0 and 1 per cent (0% in 2013, +1% in 2011 and +1% in 2009), indicating that overall
the need for equity investment has neither increased nor decreased.
72
2009
18%
2013
10%
12%
15%
13%
20%
2%
1%
4%
4%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
1%
5%
6%
5%
4%
3%
3%
2%
2%
2%
2%
10%
-2%
-2%
-5%
-5%
0%
0%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-2%
-2%
0%
TR
NO
AL
IS
IL
ME
MK
RS
LI
-15%
LT
EL
DK
BG
CY
HU
PL
LV
UK
IE
MT
FI
CZ
EU
DE
SI
EE
IT
LU
BE
SE
AT
FR
PT
ES
NL
RO
SK
HR
-10%
Q5 For each of the following types of external financing, please tell me if your
needs increased, remained unchanged or decreased over the past 6 months?
Equity investments
Base: All SMEs, % by country
Even fewer SMEs in most countries were able to answer questions about any change in the
need for debt securities and therefore, the results are not shown in this report. In 23 of the
28 EU countries, fewer than 30 per cent felt able to give an opinion on this type of financing,
with this ratio decreasing to less than 5 per cent in Estonia, Austria, Portugal and Germany.
When asked about their companys need for other finance sources, the picture was again
similar to that for the need for trade credit, where just under half of SMEs across the EU
(49%) were able to give an opinion on this type of financing. The highest level of managers
able to give an opinion were in France (65%), followed by Bulgaria (61%), Sweden (60%)
and Luxembourg (60%).
Across the EU, the highest level of SMEs reporting that their need for other finance
sources had increased were in Spain (13%) and France (13%), followed by UK (11%) and
Netherlands (11%). The EU average for reporting increased need for other finance was 9%,
which was the same as in 2011 survey and slightly higher compared to 2009 survey (5%).
The overall net change in the EU was +4% (9% reported increased need and 6% reported
decreased need) and remained unchanged compared to 2011. The only countries which
were more likely to report a net fall rather than a rise in their level of need in 2013 were
Croatia (-6%), Slovakia and Slovenia (both at -3%), Austria (-2%) and the Czech Republic (1%).
73
2011
2009
20%
4%
4%
2%
1%
1%
1%
0%
7%
6%
2%
2%
2%
1%
1%
1%
5%
4%
3%
3%
2%
10%
8%
8%
6%
6%
6%
5%
5%
5%
4%
4%
4%
4%
15%
0%
0%
-1%
-2%
-3%
-3%
0%
IL
NO
TR
IS
RS
LI
MK
AL
ME
-10%
FR
UK
EL
LU
CY
IE
LT
NL
PL
SE
DK
ES
EU
HU
FI
MT
RO
DE
IT
BE
PT
LV
BG
EE
CZ
AT
SI
SK
HR
-6%
-5%
Q5 For each of the following types of external financing, please tell me if your
needs increased, remained unchanged or decreased over the past 6 months? Other
sources
Base: All SMEs, % by country
74
Company characteristics
Micro SMEs (1-9 employees) and medium sized SMEs (10-49 employees) reported higher
levels of increased need for bank overdrafts (19% and 20% respectively) compared to large
SMEs (16%, i.e. 50-249 employees). A similar trend was observed for lower turnover SMEs
reporting a higher need for bank overdrafts. Autonomous SMEs (19%) reported a higher
level of need compared to companies which were subsidiaries or parts of enterprises (13%),
whilst construction companies reported a higher level of need (25%) than other sectors
including manufacturing, trade and services (all 18%).
The trend by company size was reversed with regard to the need for bank loans, as micro
SMEs were slightly less likely to report an increased level of need (14%) compared to
medium sized (17%) and large SMEs (17%). Similarly those SMEs with between 2 million
and 10 million turnover were slightly more likely to have an increased level of need (19%20%) as opposed to those with a turnover of less than 2 million (17%).
The trend was similar when it came to the characteristic of the enterprise, with autonomous
SMEs more likely to report an increased need (16%) compared to subsidiaries or parts of
enterprises (10%).
With respect to the need for trade credit, micro SMEs were more likely to report that this
type of financing was not applicable to them (48%) compared to medium sized (45%) and
large SMEs (41%). SMEs in the services sector (50%) were more likely than other sectors
(all 40%) to say that trade credit was not applicable to them, as were SMEs that had been
active less than two years (55%) compared to older SMEs ().
Medium sized and large SMEs were slightly more likely to have had an increased need for
trade credit (both at 11%) compared to micro SMEs (8%). SMEs in the service sector had a
lower need for trade credit (8%) compared to SMEs in all other sectors (all at 12%).
Gazelles & Innovators
Innovator SMEs were more likely than non-innovators to report an increased need for bank
overdrafts (21% versus 15%), bank loans (19% versus 12%) as well as trade credit (12%
versus 7%).
Of all growing firms, Gazelles reported a significantly higher increased need for bank
overdrafts (20%) compared to moderate growth and stagnant firms (15% and 18%
respectively). SMEs that shrank reported the highest level of increased need for bank
overdraft (29%).
The trend was reversed when it came to gazelles reported level of need for bank loans as
gazelles reported the lowest level of increased need for bank loans (12%) among growing
SMEs while high growth SMEs reported the highest (17%). As with the need for bank
overdrafts, shrinking SMEs reported the highest increase in the need for bank loans (21%).
With respect to trade credit, gazelles had the highest level of increased need (16%), followed
by high growth SMEs (13%), medium growth SMEs (8%), and SMEs reporting no growth
(8%). Those SMEs who got smaller, once again, reported a high level of increased need
(15%), but not higher than gazelles.
75
Remained unchanged
DK/NA
34
2013
20
52
28
43
48
40
2009
18
20
15
2013
7
8
8
2013
46
43
42
10
59
55
54
7
8
12
77
74
68
2009
25
29
32
0
17
18
23
32
33
32
2013
41
33
29
37
2009
Net
score
3
3
6
60
56
53
61
56
51
3
6
20
40
60
80
5
6
6
14%
44%
8%
6
5
9
38%
44%
30%
5
5
8
1%
3%
-8%
10
7
12
-1%
0%
-3%
6
5
9
29%
30%
26%
12
7
12
23%
26%
26%
100
Q10. We will now consider the terms and conditions of the bank
financing (including bank loans, overdraft and credit lines) available to
your firm. For each of the following items, could you please indicate
whether they were increased, remained unchanged or were decreased
over the past 6 months?
Base: EU-28 SMEs who applied for bank financing
However, the non-interest related costs (fees, charges, commission) of financing were
reported to have been increased by a substantial minority (43%), although just over half
reported either no change (46%) to these costs or a decrease (only 5%). These results for
2013 were slightly improved from 2011 levels (48% increase and 43% no change).
76
Stability was clearly most likely for the available maturity of the loan (77% unchanged) with
equal numbers reporting an increase (7%) or decrease (7%). The likelihood of stability has
increased slightly from 2009 and 2011 levels to 2013.
About six in ten SME borrowers reported that the other items (size of loan, collateral
requirements and other issues) had not changed in the last six months. The majority reported
that the available size of a loan was unchanged (59%) and one in six (18%) that it had
increased. However, almost as many (17%) reported a decrease in the size available. The
likelihood of stability has gradually increased from 2009 (54%) and 2011 (55%) to 2013
levels.
The collateral requirements were also reported as unchanged (60%) by a similar level of
SMEs. The likelihood of stability in this factor has also gradually increased since the 2009
survey. However, nearly one-third (32%) reported that the bank had increased the
requirements and only 3% that they had been reduced. This is virtually unchanged from 2011
levels.
Other conditions (for information or loan covenants) were reported unchanged by 61%, with
25% reporting that they had been increased and only 2% decreased. This was a small
improvement from 2011 levels, with the likelihood of stability clearly increasing from 2009
and 2011 to 2013 levels.
Country variations
Results from some countries for this question should be treated with caution where the
sample size was relatively small, the question only being asked of those SMEs which had
applied for bank financing. The following comments and comparisons are only made for
countries with a sample size of at least 50 for this question.
There were considerable differences between countries as regards changes in interest
rates. SMEs in Spain (67%), Italy (61%), Greece (58%), Finland (56%) and Ireland (54%) in
particular reported that rates had increased. In contrast, some countries reported low levels
of increase and comparatively high levels for a decrease in rates: Poland (14% increase but
42% decrease), Germany (11% increase, 32% decrease), the Czech Republic (14%
increase, 32% decrease) and Bulgaria (4% increase, 31% decrease).
Results for most countries had changed markedly since 2011 but the difference was
especially high for Finland, the only country where the level of SMES reporting increased
interest rates rose rather than fell from 2011 (34%) to 2013 (56%). There was a particularly
large difference in levels reporting decreased rates for German SMEs (11% in 2011 but 32%
in 2013) and Polish SMEs (12% in 2011 but 42% decrease in 2013)
SMEs in some countries also deviated markedly from overall EU levels, reporting that other
financing costs (fees, commission, etc.) had increased (43%) rather than decreased (5%).
There were especially high levels reporting an increase in Spain (72%), Ireland (69%),
Hungary (68%) and Italy (67%), but also some very low levels reported due to considerable
stability in these costs in some countries, such as the Czech Republic (8% reporting an
increase), Romania (13%) and Germany (15%).
The biggest country differences from 2011, compared with other country shifts, were seen in
the Czech Republic where the level reporting increased other costs fell from 23% in 2011 to
8% in 2013, and in Hungary where levels reporting increased costs rose from 42% in 2011 to
68% in 2013.
77
Collateral requirements were also more likely to have risen in certain countries, in particular
for SMEs in Greece (57%), Spain (55%) and Finland (51%) compared to the EU average for
SMEs of 32%. In contrast the least likely countries to report an increase were Germany
(13%) and Slovakia (12%) but even in these countries an increase in collateral requirements
was more likely than a decrease.
The biggest shifts from 2011 to 2013 were seen in Ireland where the levels reporting an
increase in collateral requirements over the past six months fell from 49% in 2011 to 38% in
2013, and in Finland where they rose from 31% to 51%.
The balance between those reporting an increase, decrease or no change to the available
size of loan were broadly similar across most countries except in Greece where 36%
reported it had decreased, compared to the EU average of 17%. Larger than average
decreases were also noted in Ireland (29%), Netherlands (27%) and Spain (26%).
The largest change from 2011 was seen in Ireland where 50% reported a decrease in the
size available in 2011 a figure that fell to 29% in 2013. Most of the difference was due to
higher levels in 2013 reporting no change (up from 32% to 50% in 2013).
Most countries reported similar results for changes to the available maturity of loans, the
biggest differences from the EU average (a 7% increase and decrease) being seen from
SMEs in Finland (18% increase), Greece (a 15% increase but 18% decrease), Lithuania
(16% increase), and Spain (13% decrease).
Changes to other items (e.g. loan covenants or information requirements) were greatest
in Greece where 46% reported an increase (compared with the 25% EU average) and Spain
(a 54% increase).
Company characteristics
The proportion of respondents reporting an increase in interest rates in the past six months
was lower among the largest SMEs that had applied for a bank loan than from the smallest
(29% for those with 50-249 employees, compared to 38% for those with 1-9 employees).
Results from LSEs (250+ employees) were very similar to the largest SMEs in terms of the
balance between increase versus a decrease reported in the rates. LSEs and the largest
SMEs were also the most likely to report a decrease in interest rates (25% LSE and 26% 50249 employee SMEs). Interest rates were most likely to be increased for SMEs that were
getting smaller (49%), compared to those reporting growth (29%). There was little difference
by SME sector.
Similarly, the level of non-interest costs such as charges and commissions was less likely
to have increased among the largest SMEs (34% for 50-249 employees) than the smallest
(49% for those with 1-9 staff). The results from LSEs were very similar to those from the
largest SMEs (a 33% increase reported for businesses with 250+ employees).
Family/entrepreneur-owned SMEs also had higher levels of non-interest cost increases
(49%) than listed SMEs (35%), but also than SMEs with just one owner (35%-38%). The
construction sector also had a higher level of reported increase (49% compared with 40%41% for those in industry or trade).
The available size of loan was more likely to have increased for the largest SMEs (21%)
than the smallest (15% for those with 1-9 staff). Even larger firms reported a higher likelihood
of increase still (24% reporting an increase). The growth rate of SMEs was a key factor. High
growth SMEs were most likely to report an increase (27%) in potential loan size, followed by
78
medium growth SMEs (20%), with stagnant (11%) or shrinking SMEs (16%) some way
behind.
There was little variation between types of SME in terms of results for available loan
maturity. Loan maturity was most likely to have increased for listed SMEs (13%) and those
in venture capital ownership (12%). The reported level of increase was only a little higher
among LSEs (10% increase) than SMEs (7%).
Collateral requirements were less likely to have risen for the largest SMEs (26% reporting
an increase) than the smallest (35% of those with 1-9 employees). They were especially
likely to have increased in the construction sector (42%) compared with other sectors (32%
or less). An increase was also more likely for SMEs that were getting smaller (43%) rather
than growing (28%). There was almost no difference between SMEs overall (32%) and LSEs
(31%) regarding increases to collateral requirements.
There was little difference between SME types regarding changes to other issues (e.g. loan
covenants, information requirements) except for SMEs that were getting smaller, where
over three in ten (35%) felt that these costs would increase. For stagnant (22%) and growing
firms (25%) the level of increase was significantly lower.
79
2013
11
2011
13
2009
7
11
12
17
29
47
34
28
45
30
Grow substantially
Grow moderately
Become smaller
DK/NA
Q17. Considering the turnover of the next two to three years, how much does your company
expect to grow?
Base: All SMEs, % EU-28
80
Country variations
Amongst EU countries the proportion of SMEs that expect to grow in the next two to three
years ranged from a high of 72% in Denmark to 16% in Cyprus. SMEs in Lithuania were the
most positive about their future growth, with a quarter (24%) expecting substantial growth of
over 20%. In non-EU countries SMEs in Albania were the most positive, with almost half
(48%) expecting substantial growth, and a further fifth (21%) expecting more moderate
growth, over the next two to three years.
The most dramatic fall in confidence has occurred in Cyprus, where 16% of SMEs expect
growth in the next two to three years (down from 48% in 2011), and fully a quarter (25%)
expect turnover to shrink. Whilst SMEs in Spain remain the most pessimistic, with 26%
expecting turnover to shrink, this is a reduction of nine percentage points on 2011. The
proportion expecting shrinking turnover in Greece has also reduced dramatically, from 31%
to 12% between 2011 and 2013.
Some of the largest increases in optimism have occurred in Malta, where the proportion
expecting substantial growth has risen threefold from 3% in 2011 to 12% this year (please
note that this is from a small base).
Expected growth in turnover over the next 2-3 years
Grow substant. - 20%+ per year turnover
Grow moderately - below 20% per year in terms of turnover
Stay the same size
Become smaller
DK/NA
4% 3%
100%
9%
90%
2%
10%
8%
3% 2%3%
8%6%
3%
5% 6%6%
7%
21%
80%
23%
18% 41%
23% 24%
70%
6%
3%
1%
2%
9% 4%
4%4%
3%
10%
10%
3% 3%
10%
3%
11%
25%
5%
8%
8%
12% 7%
8%
8%
12%
11%
8%
15%
6% 19%
5%
6%
12%
22%
3%
2%
2%
9%
5%
0%12%
11% 2%
30%
23%25%
27% 36%
27%
29%
31%
24%
27% 23% 29%
30%
26%
41%
30%
37%
39%
60%
21%
15%
21%
39%
46%
39%
59%
39%
32%
22%
13%
60%
56% 42%
59%
40%
49%
43%
56%
47% 56%
41%
48%
20%
LT
BG
SI
RO
SE
DK
FI
UK
PL
NL
MT
PT
SK
HU
EU
IE
LV
LU
BE
EL
IT
DE
CY
ES
HR
AT
CZ
FR
EE
24%
21%
9%
10%
17%
16% 15% 14% 12% 11%
9%
16% 16% 15%
9% 9% 8% 8% 7%7%7% 7% 6% 6%
12% 11%
5% 5%5%4%
10%
0%
37%
32%
25% 21% 17%
22% 18%
11%
AL
TR
IL
IS
ME
RS
MK
NO
LI
30%
49%
52%
20%
22%
47%
34%
42%
40%
3%
28%
50%
45% 56% 54% 48%
52% 54% 47% 46%
41%
45% 47%
36%
41% 41% 54%
11%7% 9%
33%
22%
39%
5%
10% 1%
21% 26%
6%
11% 17%
26%
3%
2% 3%
2%
6%
Q17. Considering the turnover of the next two to three years, how much does your company
expect to grow?
Base: All SMEs, % by country
81
2011
2009
37
11
30
10
29
11
11
14
9
10
19
18
Consistent growth
Stagnant turnover
Continuous decline
14
Q16. Over the last three years, how much did your firm grow on average in
terms of turnover?
Q17. Considering the turnover of the next two to three years, how much does
your company expect to grow?
Base: All SMEs, %EU28
Five per cent anticipated that their company will experience a decline over the next few
years, despite growing or remaining stable in the previous three years and a further 6%
expected the decline of the previous period to continue in the future.
One in twelve felt that having been in decline their turnover will stabilise, if not grow over the
next few years (8%) and one in nine said that they expect the company to remain the same
size despite recent growth (11%).
Overall, this represents a significant continued improvement on the previous waves of this
study, when in 2009 43% reported that they expected growth, followed by 48% in 2011 and
56% in 2013.
82
Company characteristics
As in the last wave of SAFE, LSEs were more positive about future growth than SMEs
across the EU. In this wave, seven in ten (71%) LSEs expected growth with 14% expecting
substantial growth compared to 56% overall for SMEs. The largest SMEs, with between 50
and 249 employees, were the most positive.
It should be noted that one in ten (10%) of the smallest firms (1-9 employees) expected
growth of over 20% - significantly more than larger sized SMEs. A statistically significant
proportion of the smallest SMEs also expected their turnover to remain the same size (33%)
or to decrease (14%) than larger SMEs.
Growth predictions also varied by the ownership structure of the SME. Three quarters (74%)
of firms owned by venture firms (business angels) expected growth in the next few years;
with 15% expecting substantial growth however the sample size of these firms is rather
small so this result must be treated with caution.
Of the rest of the firm ownership options, those listed on the stock market and owned by
shareholders were most likely to predict growth, with 68% saying they expect to grow. Two
thirds (64%) of firms owned by other businesses or business associates expected to grow
over the next few years and 57% of family owned firms, and 53% of firms owned by a male
individual, expected growth. The most substantial differences by work sector are to be found
in construction firms anticipating a decrease in turnover, and industrial firms expecting
growth. Construction SMEs were significantly more likely to anticipate shrinking turnover;
17% of construction firms expect to shrink, compared to 12% of those working in trade, 10%
in services and 9% in industry. SMEs working in industry were also the most positive 63%
expect to grow in the future, compared to 58% in trade, 56% of SMEs in services, and under
half (46%) of construction SMEs.
83
Yes
2013
With banks
No
Not applicable
63
2011
63
2009
60
2013
15
2011
16
2009
0%
24
10
25
13
25
19
10
2
2
2
63
22
18
DK/NA
60
27
20%
51
40%
60%
4
80%
100%
%
Q19. Do you feel confidence to talk about financing with banks and to obtain the desired
result? And how about equity investors/venture capital firms?
Base: All SMEs, %EU28
Country variations
Confidence in talking about financing with banks
Within the EU, SMEs from Malta, Slovenia and Luxembourg are the most confident in talking
to banks about finance. In Malta, nine in ten (90%) are confident of achieving their desired
result in talking to banks, and in both Slovenia and Luxembourg over eight in ten managers
expressed similar confidence (83% and 82% respectively).
As in 2011, Greek SMEs are the least confident, with fewer than three in ten (27%) confident
of achieving a desired outcome, and over half (52%) not confident. In this wave they are
joined by Cyprus, where similarly only three in ten (30%) are confident, and over half (53%)
are not confident. This represents a drop of 19 percentage points in confidence amongst
Cypriot SME managers since 2011. Managers of SMEs in Ireland and Spain are also
amongst the least confident, with over a third not confident in talking to banks about financing
(37% and 36% respectively).
As in the previous wave, a large proportion in several countries did not feel that they were
able to answer the question. Three in ten Hungarian managers (31%) did not feel able to
answer the question, and around a quarter of managers from the Czech Republic (23%) and
Slovakia (26%), Lithuania (24%), Romania (22%) and Poland (22%) also felt unable to
answer.
84
Yes
No
NOT APPLICABLE
DK/NA
3%
100%
60%
50%
14%
51%
40%
93%
75%
73%
70% 68%
53%
65% 64%
61%
63%
46%
20%
30%
27%
10%
TR
MK
NO
IS
RS
ME
IL
LI
AL
MT
SI
LU
FI
HR
PT
DE
BE
UK
SK
AT
BG
EE
FR
CZ
NL
DK
EU
SE
IT
LV
PL
ES
IE
LT
HU
RO
CY
EL
0%
Q19. Do you feel confident to talk about financing with banks and to
obtain the desired result?
Base: All SMEs, % by country
85
(18% - 29%) and Spain (7% - 13%). Outside the EU the largest increase in confidence was
recorded in Iceland (6% - 22%).
The proportion of firms who felt that this question was not applicable to their firm ranged from
a maximum of nearly nine in ten (88%) in Slovakia through to 17% in Finland.
Yes
100%
6% 1%4%
90%
80%
26%
NOT APPLICABLE
5% 1%
1%3%2%4%3%3%4%
8%
12%10%
12%
44%
2%3%
8%
4%1%
DK/NA
2% 3%3%1%1%
9% 14%
7%7% 3% 8% 7% 2%
10%
13%
14%
17%
26%
24%
55%
70%
60%
No
28%
64% 48%
53%
67% 59%
13%
46%
74% 63%
57%
29%
40%
58% 54%
46%
70%
29%
14%
43%
25%
15%
20% 28%
30%
6%
11% 12%
54%
20%
10%
14%
33%
31%
30%
27% 29%
25%
19%
29%
7% 8%
11%
25% 24%
8%
20%
7%
27% 25% 21%
15%
14%
19% 18% 16%
13%
12%
13%
11% 4% 4% 9%
14%
19% 17%
15%
13% 13% 12% 11% 10%7%
6% 4%3%
MT
NL
UK
HR
FI
DK
SI
SE
LV
CY
IE
BE
DE
PL
EU
LT
PT
HU
ES
LU
RO
FR
BG
EL
AT
EE
SK
CZ
IT
0%
52%
34%
16%
14%
7%
44%
39%
32%
13%
37%
26%
26% 24%
23%
22%
9%
TR
ME
RS
NO
IL
LI
MK
IS
AL
40%
52%
23%
50%
52%
45%
58% 61%
Q19. Do you feel confident to talk about financing with banks and to obtain the
desired result? And how about equity investors/venture capital firms?
Base: All SMEs, % by country
Company characteristics
Company confidence in talking to banks was more broadly similar across sectors, but
differed more markedly by company size and other factors:
86
Managers of SMEs working in industry were the most confident in talking to banks,
with seven in ten (69%) confident of the outcome, compared to around six in ten for
trade (63%), services (63%) and construction (61%).
Family and entrepreneur-owned firms were the most confident in talking to banks
about finance; two thirds (66%) reported being confident. This was marginally higher
than for companies owned by shareholders (60%), other firms (65%), or venture
capital (63%)l.
Overall, SME confidence across the EU has remained at the same level as 2011, with 63%
of managers expressing confidence in talking to banks.
SME manager confidence in talking to venture capital firms and equity investors is
broadly at the same level as 2011 too, with 15% expressing confidence in 2013 and 16% in
2011. Almost twice as many managers of larger SMEs (50-249 employees) expressed
confidence in talking to these investors about finance as the smallest SMEs (1-9 employees);
with 20% of the largest firms and 11% of the smallest being confident.
As might be expected, almost half (48%) of SMEs owned by equity investors and venture
capital firms were confident in talking to these firms about finance, although a third (35%) felt
it was not applicable to their firm.
Across all firms in the EU, confidence in talking to equity investors and venture capital firms
has remained stable between 2011 and 2013. The proportion of LSEs expressing confidence
has risen one percentage point from 27% to 28%, whilst the proportion of SMEs expressing
confidence has fallen from 16% to 15%.
87
2013
2011
2009
9
5
4
7
6
12
14
63
67
13
63
Bank loan
Equity investment
Other
DK/NA
Q20. If you need external financing to realise your growth ambitions, what type of external
financing would you prefer most?
Base: SMEs that expect to grow in the next two to three years, %EU-28
Country variations
In all countries except Serbia, bank loans were the preferred form of financing. Amongst
those countries where the largest proportion of SMEs favoured bank loans, the proportion
varied from a high of 83% in Croatia to 35% in Cyprus although the low number of SMEs
interviewed in both these countries means the results should be treated with caution.
In Greece the proportion of SMEs where bank loans were the preferred method of external
financing rebounded sharply from 2011, from 38% to 71%. At the same time, the proportion
preferring subordinated loans fell from nearly one in three (27%) to three per cent.
In Serbia, 65% said that subordinated loans were their preferred method of external financing
although as with the previous results this is based on a small number of SMEs. Loans from
other sources were particularly popular in the Netherlands and Poland where around one in
88
five (18% and 21% respectively) said that this was their preferred means of external
financing.
Equity investments were typically chosen by fewer than one in ten SME managers across the
countries surveyed, but were significantly higher in Turkey (18%), Ireland (12%) and Latvia
(15%).
Most preferred type of external financing to realise growth ambitions Bank Loans
2013
2011
2009
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
16%
43%
52%
55%
55%
58%
63%
65%
35%
36%
52%
53%
53%
57%
58%
58%
59%
62%
63%
63%
64%
67%
69%
70%
70%
71%
71%
72%
72%
74%
75%
75%
76%
78%
79%
79%
72%
NO
IS
IL
LI
TR
AL
MK
ME
RS
0%
HR
LU
IT
MT
SI
FR
CZ
SK
IE
PT
EL
DE
BE
FI
ES
EU
AT
UK
SE
LT
HU
BG
PL
EE
LV
DK
NL
RO
CY
83%
10%
Q20. If you need external financing to realise your growth ambitions, what type of external
financing would you prefer most?
Base: SMEs that expect to grow in the next two to three years, %by country
Company characteristics
Across most different types of SMEs and LSEs, bank loans were the most preferred form of
external financing, usually gathering between six in ten and seven in ten responses.
However, autonomous companies were significantly more likely to prefer bank loans than
subsidiary and branch firms (69% to 52%).
Family or entrepreneur-owned SMEs (72%) and individual male-owned SMEs (70%) were
significantly more likely to prefer bank loans than other ownership structures compared to
around half (47%) of shareholder-owned firms and other business-owned SMEs (53%), and
closer to six in ten individual female-owned SMEs (61%) and venture capital or equity firmowned SMEs (57%).
Shareholder-owned SMEs and SMEs owned by other businesses were more likely than
other types of firms to prefer loans from other sources, with around one in four managers
choosing this option (24% and 23% respectively).
89
2013
2011
15
19
11
16
19
24
2009
17
27
11
26
27
15
29
17
20
Country variations
A majority of SME managers in Denmark 56% either could not or would not say what
level of financing they were aiming for in order to achieve their growth ambitions over the
next few years. Other countries where this proportion was high were Sweden (43%),
Romania (37%), Cyprus (38%) and Estonia (35%). Outside of the EU this response was
even higher reaching 87% in Albania, 53% in Iceland, and 38% in Norway.
Amongst those who could give an answer, there were large differences between countries in
the level of funding SME managers hoped to obtain. One fifth of SME managers in the
Netherlands (18%), and one in seven managers from Denmark (14%) and the UK (15%),
said they were seeking over 1 million in funding, significantly more than the EU average,
and far higher than the one per cent of SME managers in Estonia who were seeking the
same level of funding.
Similarly, the proportion of SME seeking the smallest level of funding under 25,000
varied from around one quarter in Poland (24%) and Bulgaria (23%), and two in ten in
Romania (21%) and the UK (20%), down to fewer than one in twenty in Finland, Greece,
Denmark (all 7%), and Estonia (6%). One per cent of SME managers in Luxembourg were
seeking the smallest level of funding, but the base sizes involved in Luxembourg mean that
this result should be treated with caution.
Amount of financing to obtain
100%
DK/NA
Over 1,000,000
250,000 - 999,999
100,000 - 249,999
25,000 - 99,999
7
90%
20
19
12
14
37
80%
70%
23
24
30
8 38
15
17
12 4
16
40%
12
6 8
14
18
21 14 14
21
22
12
15
24
22
24
37
22
24
87
12
20
19
18
15
15
11
30
31
17
31
11
22 25 27
6
22
8 30
26
22
25
28
11
3 20 23
14
8
10
17 17 17 17 16 16 15
13 13 12 12 11 11 11
10 9 8
8
7 7 7 6
1
PL
CY
BG
LV
RO
UK
SK
IE
CZ
HU
FR
ES
PT
EU
DE
LT
AT
NL
HR
SE
BE
SI
IT
MT
FI
DK
EL
EE
LU
0%
23 22
10 12
18
12
10
24 23 22 21 20 20
16
27
26 23
11
30
15
17
14 26
17
19
31 29
18
1
6
14
23
53
14
13
17
17
12
17
35
27
14
22 28
13
56
15
19
18
20
38
20
19
17
17
12
11 19
12
16
26
10 43
20
11
20%
10%
29
11 35
11
13 12
28
13
17
23 13
25 43
14
26
17
30%
23
23
8
19
24 14
16
17 3
11
12 18
11
17
11
16
15
14
50%
18 19
15 5
11
60%
29
11
3
11
13
22
22
13
2
2
2
13 12 11 11
1
9 7 7
6
RS
MK
TR
IS
ME
IL
LI
NO
AL
91
15%
25,000
99,999
24%
100,000
249,999
17%
250,000 - Over
DK/NA
1,000,000 1,000,000
15%
11%
19%
15%
25%
18%
16%
10%
16%
21%
26%
13%
16%
11%
13%
Equity
investment
9%
24%
19%
20%
20%
9%
Subordinated
loans etc.
15%
27%
14%
14%
20%
10%
Other
18%
21%
15%
13%
11%
22%
Q20. If you need external financing to realise your growth ambitions, what type of external
financing would you prefer most?
Q21. And what amount of financing would you prefer most?
Base: Companies that expect to grow in the next two to three years, Row % EU28
Company characteristics
As might be expected, LSEs were significantly more likely to aim for larger sums of money
when considering their future financial needs. 55% of LSE managers questioned said that
they would be seeking more than 1 million in financing, compared to one in ten (11%) of
SMEs overall. Similarly, over half of SMEs with a turnover exceeding 50 million per year
(56%) said that they would be seeking more than 1 million in financing.
SMEs working in industry were significantly more likely than firms in other sectors to aim for
over 1 million in external finance, with 17% saying this was their goal, compared to 11% of
construction firms, 10% of firms in services, and 9% of firms in trade.
92
The financing needs of gazelles and innovator firms, as far as the level of finance required is
concerned, did not differ significantly from the finance needs of SMEs overall.
2011
2009
37
35
20
20
24
3
3
33
7
6
7
Other
10
6
5
5
DK/NA
8
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Q22. What do you see as the most important limiting factor to get this financing?
Base: SMEs that expect to grow in the next two to three years, % EU-28
Amongst the mangers of SMEs who would prefer equity investment or mezzanine funding,
the biggest obstacle was the interest rate being too high, identified by one in four (25%)
93
managers questioned. Other concerns were the second most frequently cited (18%),
followed by financing not being available at all (16%) and reduced control over the firm
(12%). The level citing each type of concern has decreased since 2011.
A new code for this wave of the survey was that there are no obstacles; around one quarter
(24%) of SME managers felt that there were no obstacles to getting external financing.
Most important limiting factor to get external financing to realise growth ambitions
Those who prefer equity investment or mezzanine
2013
2011
2009
24
There are no obstacles
25
27
34
12
Reduced control over firm
19
15
16
21
24
18
Other
22
14
5
DK/NA
12
13
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Q22. What do you see as the most important limiting factor to get this financing?
Base: SMEs that expect to grow in the next two to three years, % EU-28
N.B. There are no obstacles not included as an option in 2011/2009
Country variations
The questions about limiting factors that might stop managers receiving the required external
financing were only presented to respondents who said that they expected their company to
grow in the next two to three years. Further, each question was only asked of those who
would prefer that type of financing. Because of this, the sample size for each country was
relatively small and therefore caution is needed when interpreting the results at the individual
country level.
In the chart below, data for all countries has been included, but those marked at the base
with an asterisk have an effective base size of less than 50. The data for these countries can
only be used for illustrative purposes.
94
SMEs in Austria and Germany were the most likely to say that they saw no obstacles to
obtaining financing. German managers were the most optimistic, with nearly seven in ten
(69%) foreseeing no obstacles. In Austria the figure was 65%. By comparison just seven per
cent of Greek SME managers saw no obstacles to obtaining funding.
Generally, SME managers were most likely to see interest rates being too high as the
biggest obstacle to obtaining financing. Six in ten (61%) Portuguese SME managers and half
(51%) of Romanian managers thought that high interest rates were the biggest obstacle. The
largest proportion of managers who said that insufficient collateral was an issue were to be
found in Italy, where insufficient collateral was cited by three in ten (30%).
SME managers in Ireland and Greece were by some distance the most likely to say that this
sort of funding was not available at all, with over four in ten (42%) of Greek SMEs, and three
in ten (30%) of Irish SMEs claiming that this was the case.
Most important limiting factor to get a loan
There are no obstacles
Other
DK/NA
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
3%
3%
3%
4%
4%
6% 8% 7%
6%
6%
7% 5% 6% 7% 6%
8%
9%
9%
10%
6%
2%
13%
7%
14%
14%
13%
1%
1%
15%
7%
1%
16%
2% 2% 4%
2%
17% 19%
5%
7%
5%
1% 1%
4% 11%
0% 7% 0% 16%
0% 5%
6% 6%
4% 2%
1%
3%
8%
3%
2%
12%
4%
0%
1%
10% 10%
2%
0%
7%
6%
3%
3%
4%
19%
8%
12%
3%
13%
21%
2%
16% 3%
3%
10% 14% 7%
2%
42% 45%
21% 29%
3% 17%
33%
11% 19%
9%
30%
6%
10%
19%
36% 33% 6% 27%
26%
48%
31%
7%
18% 21% 19%23%
46%
61%
0%
23%
19%
26%
19%
3%
9% 25%
23%
20%
21%
7%
9%
17%
0%
15% 13%
35%
25%30%
31%
69%
12%
65%
49%
27%
48% 48% 46%
20%
44%
40%
7%
32%29%
26%
23% 21%
21%
** *
17%
22% 2%
1%
18% 16%
14% 12%
34%
9% 0%
33%
19%
1%
23%
23%
16%
37% 69%
16%
19%
67%
44%
41% 38%
30%
38%
31%
14%
20% 18%
2%
7% 4% 7% 5%
0%
7% 9%
10%
1%
28%
2% 0%
0%
10%
21%
12%
5%
3% 11%
0%
15%
31%
30% 0%
17%
7% 6%
0%
AT
DE
LU
FI
SK
HU
CZ
DK
FR
NL
BE
EU
MT
LV
EE
SE
BG
SI
UK
PL
IT
LT
IE
PT
ES
HR
RO
EL
CY
10%
0%
22%
13%
41%
6%
0%
5%
LI
IS
TR
NO
RS
MK
AL
IL
ME
100%
* **
* ** **
Q22. What do you see as the most important limiting factor to get this financing?
Base: SMEs that expect to grow in the next two to three years, % EU-28
The base sizes for firms that said they preferred mezzanine or equity funding as their source
of funding are too small in every country for a country analysis.
At the EU level, one in five (20%) of SMEs foresaw no problems in obtaining funding through
their preferred channel. A further one in five (20%) saw high interest rates as the chief
obstacle, and a similar proportion (20%) saw this type of funding not being available at all as
the main problem. Again, one in five (20%) cited other problems as the most important
limiting factor, whilst 16% saw reduced control over their firm as the main issue.
95
Company characteristics
The most established SMEs were more likely to report that there are no obstacles to them
getting the funding required to grow their company. Almost four in ten (39%) of SMEs that
are more than ten years old said they foresaw no obstacles to obtaining funding, compared
with 31% of firms aged between two and ten years old, and 27% of firms younger than two
years old.
The smallest SMEs are most likely to say that high interest rates are the main obstacle to
obtaining funding. One quarter (24%) of SMEs with 1-9 employees cite this as the biggest
obstacle, significantly more than SMEs with 10-49 (16%) and 50-249 employees (15%).
96
Remained unchanged
Not applicable
Net
score
2013
11
10
2013
17
17
15
2009
2013
2013
2013
2009
2013 1
2009
Other
2013
2009
0%
14
6
9
44
41
32
39
47
1
2
38
48
20%
40%
60%
3
3
6%
5%
-1%
3
3
3%
-3%
-3%
2
3
2%
-3%
-2%
2
2
2%
1%
0%
2
2
0%
-1%
-1%
3
2
4%
1%
0%
6
47
53
38
2%
-3%
79
78
65
34
11
2
3
71
68
26
8
6
4
14
4
23
25
58
16
17
1
1
17
47
21
22
20
21
11
40
41
48
4
5
4
25
24
11
12
50
8
7
6
2009
9
13
50
48
57
14
11
11
2009
Trade credit
52
51
80%
100%
Q23. For each of the following types of financing available to your firm, could you please
indicate whether you think they will improve, deteriorate, or remain unchanged over the next
6 months?
Base: All SMEs, % EU-28
97
Country variations
In this section, we focus solely on the responses of managers who gave an answer.
Expected availability of internal funds
Managers of SMEs in the UK were the most optimistic overall about the availability of internal
funds, with a net score of +26% overall. The least positive were SME managers from Cyprus,
Greece and France, although the small base size means that the Cypriot percentage must
not be taken at face value. The score of -10% in France represents a sharp drop in
confidence in the availability of internal funds although larger drops were recorded in several
countries, most notably Finland and Latvia.
Optimism has risen most sharply in Hungary, with the net score rising by 24 percentage
points from -10% to +14% since 2011. Other sharp rises were seen in the UK, where the net
score rose by 16 percentage points, as well as in Estonia, where optimism on internal fund
availability rose from +2% to +16%. This marks a further rise from the 2009 net score, which
was one of the lowest at -21%.
Six in ten (60%) SME managers in Finland believe that the level of availability of internal
funds will remain the same over the next six months; the highest score for this wave of the
survey. Belief that the availability of internal funds would remain the same dropped sharply in
Denmark, from 58% in 2011 to 34% in this wave of the survey.
2011
2009
10%
14%
12%
21%
18%
26%
26%
3%
1%
6%
4%
8%
7%
9%
8%
9%
10%
10%
12%
14%
14%
16%
18%
15%
10%
9%
10%
16%
20%
25%
30%
26%
40%
25%
40%
50%
-10%
-10%
-3%
-3%
-1%
-10%
-2%
0%
-40%
UK
LT
SE
EE
IE
MT
HR
HU
SK
DE
BG
FI
AT
RO
PL
DK
ES
BE
EU
LV
NL
CZ
PT
SI
LU
IT
FR
EL
CY
-30%
TR
IS
NO
AL
IL
ME
MK
LI
RS
-22%
-20%
Q23. For each of the following types of financing available to your firm, could you please
indicate whether you think they will improve, deteriorate, or remain unchanged over the next
6 months?
Base: % by country
98
2011
2009
33%
40%
2%
5%
7%
6%
16%
12%
16%
3%
2%
4%
3%
4%
4%
5%
4%
5%
5%
6%
5%
11%
11%
12%
16%
13%
11%
8%
7%
10%
17%
20%
16%
30%
-7%
-11%
-15%
-20%
-11%
-8%
-10%
-3%
-3%
0%
TR
IS
IL
MK
NO
AL
LI
ME
RS
-40%
LT
MT
EE
BG
HR
SK
UK
PL
HU
DK
PT
ES
LV
SE
DE
BE
IT
CZ
RO
EU
LU
IE
AT
FI
NL
FR
EL
SI
CY
-32%
-30%
Q23. For each of the following types of financing available to your firm, could you please
indicate whether you think they will improve, deteriorate, or remain unchanged over the next
6 months?
Base: % by country
99
2011
2009
31%
40%
-4%
0%
-3%
4%
-19%
-8%
-4%
-1%
-18%
-20%
-7%
-10%
-2%
0%
0%
2%
10%
5%
10%
0%
0%
1%
1%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
3%
3%
3%
3%
4%
3%
5%
5%
8%
6%
10%
16%
20%
15%
30%
TR
IS
IL
ME
MK
AL
NO
LI
RS
-40%
LT
UK
BG
PL
SK
DK
HU
HR
ES
IE
PT
SE
EE
RO
IT
MT
EU
BE
DE
CZ
LV
FI
LU
AT
NL
SI
FR
EL
CY
-30%
Q23. For each of the following types of financing available to your firm, could you please
indicate whether you think they will improve, deteriorate, or remain unchanged over the next
6 months?
Base: % by country
100
2011
2009
38%
40%
23%
24%
30%
37%
50%
5%
7%
5%
0%
1%
1%
1%
1%
2%
1%
2%
2%
3%
3%
4%
3%
5%
4%
5%
5%
10%
9%
12%
20%
-2%
-5%
-3%
-4%
-1%
-2%
-1%
-1%
-1%
-1%
TR
NO
IL
AL
ME
MK
IS
RS
LI
-20%
LT
UK
LV
BG
DK
SE
IE
FI
BE
PL
LU
NL
EU
MT
AT
DE
EE
HU
PT
RO
ES
CY
IT
SK
CZ
HR
FR
EL
SI
-10%
-1%
0%
0%
Q23. For each of the following types of financing available to your firm, could you please
indicate whether you think they will improve, deteriorate, or remain unchanged over the next
6 months?
Base: % by country
101
2011
2009
2%
5%
4%
6%
6%
8%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
2%
2%
3%
2%
4%
4%
4%
4%
5%
4%
5%
5%
8%
6%
5%
7%
10%
8%
10%
13%
15%
11%
20%
-2%
-5%
-6%
IL
LI
TR
NO
ME
MK
IS
AL
RS
-2%
-4%
-2%
LT
UK
SK
EE
PL
BG
HU
DK
SE
DE
NL
IE
LU
EU
ES
AT
RO
PT
BE
IT
MT
HR
LV
CZ
FI
EL
FR
CY
SI
-5%
-2%
0%
0%
-10%
-15%
-20%
Q23. For each of the following types of financing available to your firm, could you please
indicate whether you think they will improve, deteriorate, or remain unchanged over the next
6 months?
Base: % by country
102
Company characteristics
Internal funds
LSEs were more confident about the future availability of internal funds than SMEs. Almost
three in ten (28%) of LSE managers said that the availability of internal funding would
increase in the next six months, compared with one fifth (19%) managers of SMEs. The very
smallest SMEs, those with between one and nine employees, were the least confident about
the future availability of internal funds. Only 15% of SME managers felt that the availability of
these funds would increase significantly smaller than the proportion of larger-size SMEs
who felt that same way.
Companies listed on the stock market, and those owned by venture capital firms, were also
more likely to be optimistic about the availability of internal funds in the future. One quarter of
managers of stock market-listed (25%) and venture capital-owned (26%) firms, felt that the
availability of internal funds would increase over the next six months; a significantly larger
proportion than for all other ownership structures.
Bank loans
Managers of SMEs with the smallest level of turnover were significantly more likely to say
that the availability of bank loans was likely to decrease in the next six months. Fourteen per
cent of SME managers of firms with a turnover of less than 2 million per annum felt that the
availability of such loans would decrease double the proportion of SME managers of firms
with turnover above 50 million per annum who felt that same way (7%). Larger firms are not
significantly more likely to think that availability of bank loans will increase, however but
they are significantly more likely to believe that the availability of loans will remain the same.
Whilst 48% of firms with turnover under 2 million believe that the availability of bank loans
will remain the same, the proportion rises for firms with turnover between 2 million and 10
million (55%), 10 million and 50 million (56%), and over 50 million (60%).
However there has been a small but significant increase in optimism around the availability of
trade credit across the EU, with the net availability score rising from 0% to +4%. Optimism in
the availability of equity investments has remained at the same level as measured in 2011.
6.9
Tax incentives
6.6
5.8
5.7
4.0
3.2
0
Q24. On a scale of 1-10, where 10 means it is extremely important and 1 means it is not at
all important, how important are each of the following factors for your companys financing in
the future?
Base: mean scores EU-28 SMEs
104
Country variations
Making existing public measures easier to obtain was considered to be especially
important in Italy and Malta, both of which have an overall mean score of over 8 (8.4 and 8.2
respectively). These two countries had the highest rating for this mechanism in 2011 as well
(8.6 for Malta and 8.2 for Italy). In contrast, it is seen as less important in Sweden and
Denmark, where scores under 5 are seen. Again, this is in line with the distribution of scores
in 2011 for these countries.
Importance of making existing public measures easier to obtain in companies
financing in the future
Mean
2013
2011
472%
550%
RS
ME
MK
IL
TR
AL
IS
LI
NO
536%
647%
645%
678%
673%
776%
705%
4.65
5.20
4.92
6.08
6.11
6.10
6.14
IT
MT
EL
FR
HR
CY
BG
PT
HU
ES
PL
SI
RO
BE
EU
LU
LT
IE
AT
NL
CZ
FI
SK
UK
DE
LV
EE
SE
DK
5.31
6.12
6.46
6.25
6.64
6.49
6.88
6.80
6.97
7.14
7.12
7.29
7.21
7.38
7.31
7.52
7.60
7.39
6.88
7.54
8.36
8.23
10
5
4
3
2
1
0
Q24. On a scale of 1-10, where 10 means it is extremely important and 1 means it is not at
all important, how important are each of the following factors for your companys financing in
the future?
Base: mean scores by country
105
Tax incentives are seen to be particularly important in Cyprus (8.5), Italy (8.3), Malta and
Greece (8.2 each), but receive scores below 5 out of 10 in the Czech Republic (4.2) and
Denmark (4.4). This distribution is broadly similar to that seen in the 2011 wave of the
survey.
2011
420%
539%
531%
631%
584%
710%
TR
RS
IL
ME
MK
AL
IS
NO
LI
697%
4.17
726%
740%
5.53
5.59
5.54
5.83
6.12
CY
IT
MT
EL
LT
LV
HU
PT
SI
BG
PL
ES
HR
AT
EU
RO
EE
UK
FI
IE
FR
BE
SK
NL
LU
DE
SE
DK
CZ
4.39
5.78
6.09
6.28
6.21
6.42
6.30
6.59
6.53
7.03
7.13
7.03
7.38
7.57
7.55
8.25
8.22
7.70
7.18
6.74
7.66
8.47
8.28
10
4
3
2
1
0
Q24. On a scale of 1-10, where 10 means it is extremely important and 1 means it is not at
all important, how important are each of the following factors for your companys financing in
the future?
Base: mean scores by country
106
In Cyprus, SME managers were most likely to say that guarantees for loans would be
important in their companys future financing (mean score of 7.6). Guarantees for loans were
also seen as important mechanisms by managers in Greece and Italy (7.4 and 7.4
respectively). In 2011, Cyprus was similarly the country where most managers rated
guarantees for loans as important.
In contrast, Germany (4.3), the Czech Republic (4.2) and Denmark (4.0) had the lowest
rating for the importance of this mechanism.
531%
454%
582%
568%
635%
622%
648%
672%
324%
4.31
4.20
5.24
4.99
4.74
4.38
3.98
4.76
5.09
5.39
5.33
5.62
5.55
5.74
5.72
5.80
5.78
5.93
6.13
6.02
6.20
6.15
7.41
7.58
6.47
6.26
5.89
2011
6.99
7.49
2013
8
3
2
TR
ME
IS
RS
MK
AL
IL
NO
LI
CY
EL
IT
ES
FR
BE
PT
RO
BG
FI
IE
SE
EU
SK
LT
MT
PL
NL
HU
HR
LV
SI
LU
UK
EE
AT
DE
CZ
DK
Q24. On a scale of 1-10, where 10 means it is extremely important and 1 means it is not at
all important, how important are each of the following factors for your companys financing in
the future?
Base: mean scores by country
107
As seen elsewhere, Malta (7.3), Italy (7.1) and Cyprus (7.0) were the countries where SME
managers considered business support services as important in companies financing in
the future. Again, Denmark is the country where the perceived value of this mechanism is
most muted (with a mean score of 3.5 out of 10). These results are broadly aligned with
those from 2011.
2011
539%
472%
625%
572%
652%
643%
399%
697%
717%
3.48
4.64
4.44
4.99
4.78
5.23
5.22
5.28
5.25
5.42
5.32
5.50
5.45
5.56
5.52
5.77
5.68
5.86
5.81
6.01
6.44
6.75
6.95
6.60
6.19
5.98
6.94
7.30
7.14
3
2
IL
TR
ME
AL
RS
MK
IS
LI
NO
MT
IT
CY
LT
RO
BG
PT
ES
SK
HR
EL
FR
IE
EU
HU
PL
AT
FI
LV
NL
BE
EE
LU
SI
UK
DE
SE
CZ
DK
Q24. On a scale of 1-10, where 10 means it is extremely important and 1 means it is not at
all important, how important are each of the following factors for your companys financing in
the future?
Base: mean scores by country
108
The overall mean score for measures to facilitate equity investments is 4.0 out of 10,
which mirrors the overall EU rating in 2011 (4.1). This is the lowest overall rating for any of
the mechanisms measured in the survey. At the top of the country distribution is Cyprus once
more, with a mean of 7.1 and at the bottom of that range is Estonia, with a mean score of just
1.6.
The UK and Ireland have the highest proportion of SME managers saying that they cannot
answer for this mechanism, either because they do not know or it is not applicable to their
firm (26% and 28% respectively).
2011
358%
229%
335%
471%
1.64
444%
548%
2.51
1.87
2.64
2.55
3.06
3.01
3.19
3.18
3.55
3.42
3.83
3.59
4.04
4.31
4.22
4.43
4.49
4.45
5.21
5.57
5.29
4.98
4.61
4.38
3.96
4.99
523%
703%
7.13
6.41
667%
TR
RS
IL
AL
ME
IS
MK
NO
LI
CY
EL
ES
RO
LT
BG
HU
PL
SI
PT
LV
IT
FR
IE
FI
EU
MT
BE
SE
UK
DK
AT
SK
NL
HR
DE
LU
CZ
EE
Q24. On a scale of 1-10, where 10 means it is extremely important and 1 means it is not at
all important, how important are each of the following factors for your companys financing in
the future?
Base: mean scores by country
109
Export credits or guarantees receive a higher overall EU rating in 2013 (5.8 out of 10) than
in 2011 (3.3), but Cyprus and Greece again have relatively high value on this mechanisms
importance to companies future financing. Greece has a mean score of 7.6, while Cyprus
and Italy have average ratings of 7.1,
Denmark, the Czech Republic and Germany once again have the lowest importance ratings
for export credits or guarantees.
531%
454%
582%
568%
635%
622%
648%
672%
324%
4.31
4.20
4.99
4.74
4.38
3.98
4.76
5.24
5.09
5.39
5.33
5.62
5.55
5.74
5.72
5.80
5.78
5.93
6.13
6.02
6.20
6.15
7.41
7.58
6.47
6.26
5.89
2011
6.99
7.49
2013
8
3
2
TR
ME
IS
RS
MK
AL
IL
NO
LI
CY
EL
IT
ES
FR
BE
PT
RO
BG
FI
IE
SE
EU
SK
LT
MT
PL
NL
HU
HR
LV
SI
LU
UK
EE
AT
DE
CZ
DK
Q24. On a scale of 1-10, where 10 means it is extremely important and 1 means it is not at
all important, how important are each of the following factors for your companys financing in
the future?
Base: mean scores by country
Company characteristics
Views on the importance of each factor in future financing did not vary much according to the
size or type of the company in question. As a general rule, SMEs tended to rate each factor
as more important to their future financing than LSEs.
110
2011
2009
32
A new or significantly improved product or
service to the market
33
34
25
25
26
24
23
22
24
22
23
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Country variations
Comparatively high levels of innovation were reported by SME managers in Malta (74%
introducing some form of innovative activity) and Finland (72%). In most EU countries at
least half the SMEs had introduced at least one of these types of innovation in the past 12
months, with only Estonia being clearly below average (35%). In most cases levels had
changed little since 2011, apart from a significant increase in Finland (50% to 72%) and a big
decrease in Latvia (down from 73% to 48%).
Levels of innovation were slightly higher among non-EU SMEs, especially in Iceland (78%)
and Turkey (75%), and in most cases had increased from 2011 levels.
Companies that introduced at least one innovative activity in the past 12 months
2013
2011
2009
100%
56%
66%
61%
67%
67%
69%
68%
78%
75%
35%
47%
46%
50%
52%
56%
51%
48%
50%
53%
56%
56%
57%
57%
58%
58%
59%
58%
59%
61%
61%
63%
62%
63%
66%
63%
59%
60%
66%
70%
72%
80%
74%
90%
40%
30%
20%
IS
TR
ME
MK
RS
AL
IL
NO
LI
0%
MT
FI
CZ
IE
ES
PT
RO
BG
LU
DK
SK
SE
IT
HR
UK
NL
PL
EU
SI
AT
FR
BE
EL
CY
DE
LV
HU
LT
EE
10%
112
2013
2011
2009
80%
27%
37%
29%
41%
40%
45%
43%
51%
52%
25%
26%
26%
29%
30%
27%
23%
20%
20%
30%
31%
33%
32%
33%
35%
36%
35%
36%
36%
37%
39%
42%
40%
37%
34%
30%
30%
37%
40%
42%
50%
44%
60%
54%
70%
IS
MK
TR
RS
AL
ME
IL
NO
LI
0%
MT
FI
BG
CZ
SK
SI
PL
IT
IE
RO
LU
NL
PT
DK
LT
AT
UK
EU
ES
HU
HR
SE
LV
DE
FR
CY
BE
EL
EE
10%
113
2013
2011
2009
60%
16%
24%
21%
32%
27%
36%
36%
15%
12%
17%
16%
18%
17%
18%
18%
20%
22%
21%
24%
26%
25%
26%
29%
29%
31%
31%
30%
27%
26%
24%
22%
19%
20%
29%
30%
31%
34%
40%
33%
41%
41%
50%
RS
TR
ME
IS
MK
NO
AL
IL
LI
0%
FI
CZ
BG
PT
SI
IT
IE
SK
RO
LU
ES
DK
UK
SE
MT
EU
NL
PL
HR
BE
LT
DE
AT
CY
EL
FR
HU
LV
EE
10%
SMEs in Finland (41%) and Czech Republic (34%) were the most likely EU countries to have
introduced a new or significantly improved production process or method. The level in most
EU countries was at least 18% (one in six) but this type of innovation was least frequent in
Estonia (12%) and Latvia (15%).
The level of this type of innovation has remained steady or risen in most countries since
2011, with the biggest increases seen in Finland (19% to 41%) and Czech Republic (23% to
34%). However, there were significant declines in Croatia (33% to 21%), Latvia (38% to
15%) and Estonia (23% to 12%).
Outside the EU there were also big drops in Serbia (53% to 41%) and Montenegro (48% to
36%).
114
2013
2011
2009
52%
60%
18%
29%
27%
31%
36%
39%
12%
11%
15%
15%
16%
16%
19%
IL
AL
TR
ME
RS
LI
NO
IS
MK
ES
EL
RO
FR
PT
CY
SE
BE
DK
MT
LU
IE
HR
UK
EU
IT
FI
BG
DE
CZ
AT
NL
LV
SI
PL
SK
EE
HU
LT
0%
7%
10%
18%
21%
23%
22%
24%
25%
25%
25%
26%
26%
26%
27%
28%
30%
27%
27%
23%
20%
20%
29%
33%
30%
32%
40%
38%
45%
50%
In most EU countries between 20% and 33% of SMEs had introduced a new organisation of
their management in the last 12 months, with the highest levels seen in Spain (33%) and
Greece (32%). Very low levels of reorganisation were reported Estonia (12%), Hungary
(11%) and Lithuania (7%).
Levels of reorganisation were broadly similar to 2011 levels apart from a marked increase in
Greece (21% to 32%) and, outside the EU, in Israel (23% to 52%) and Albania (24% to
45%).
115
2013
2011
2009
33%
11%
23%
35%
34%
40%
38%
43%
15%
14%
15%
15%
20%
18%
21%
21%
22%
20%
22%
23%
22%
25%
23%
26%
25%
27%
27%
28%
31%
32%
32%
34%
33%
30%
27%
30%
34%
40%
35%
50%
45%
53%
60%
TR
ME
MK
IS
RS
AL
IL
NO
LI
0%
FI
IE
ES
RO
PT
NL
MT
HR
UK
BG
IT
LV
FR
DK
EU
EL
SI
PL
BE
SK
CZ
HU
SE
AT
LT
LU
EE
CY
DE
10%
116
117
Companies average yearly growth (in terms of turnover and number of employees)
Over 20% per year
No growth
2013
13
38
15
2009
37
21
2013
In terms of employment regarding
the number of full-time or part-time
equivalent employees 2011
2009
22
24
21
20
26
11
33
21
10
26
41
11
26
39
13
0%
24
20%
19
21
40
40%
60%
80%
2 4
21
23
21
17
3 2
100%
Q16. Over the last three years, how much did your firm grow on average per year..?
Base: All SMEs,% EU-28
SMEs were also asked how much their business had grown per year in terms of turnover
over the last three years. Growth results were more positive than for employment, with just
over half (51%) reporting some degree of growth in turnover, 38% growing up to 20% per
year and 13% growing over 20%.One in five (22%) reported stable turnover and no growth
over the last three years, but nearly a quarter (24%) were getting smaller on this measure.
This was larger than the proportion getting smaller in terms of employees. Stability year on
year was clearly more likely for employee numbers (41%) than for turnover (22%).
The net growth level for turnover was +28%, nearly twice as high as the net level for
employee numbers (+15%). Net turnover growth levels were very similar to 2011 (+26%) but
below 2009 levels (+35%).
118
No growth
Got smaller
0% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 0% 1% 1% 0% 1% 1% 0%
3% 1%
3% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 0% 1% 4%
9%
11%
13%
11%
13% 11%
15%
11%
14%
15%16%
20% 11%
19%
24%
27% 24%
23%
16%
27%
27% 24%
28%
31%
35%
38%
38%
23%
47%
20% 21% 9%
48% 23%
24%
28%
26%
23%
21%
25%
25%
24%
19% 24%
19%
23%
22%
24%
21%
23%
23%
20%
28%
25%
21%
21%
24%
5%
2% 1% 3%
39%
40% 31%29%
37%
42%
33%
52%
30%
15%
51%
36%
29%
24%
20%
58%
40%
37%
43%
51%
47%
21%
56%
43%
15%
16%
21%
10%
23%
52%
31%
20%
50%
39%
34%
28% 29%
38%
43%
20%
28% 28%
21%20% 19%
24% 23%
21%
17% 17%
8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 7% 7%
4%
8%
TR
RS
AL
IL
MK
IS
ME
NO
LI
24% 24%23%
BG
PL
LT
SE
RO
LV
NL
UK
FI
MT
DK
BE
HU
SI
SK
EU
DE
PT
FR
AT
CY
EL
EE
IE
ES
IT
HR
LU
CZ
0%
0%
0%
1% 0% 1% 1% 1%
5%
5%
6%
9%
13%
17%
8% 19%
10%
6%
25%
13%
26%
17%
42%
27%
10%
Q16. Over the last three years, how much did your firm grow on average per year..?
Base: All SMEs, % by country
Country variations
The countries with the highest proportion of SMEs reporting high growth in turnover (i.e. over
20% per year over the last three years) were Bulgaria (24%), Poland (24%) and Lithuania
(23%). Taking high and moderate growth together, German SMEs were the most likely to
report turnover growth each year (65%), followed by Sweden (63%), Lithuania (62%), and
Austria (63%). Outside the EU Turkish SMEs reported the highest level of strong growth in
turnover (43%).
The biggest levels of falling turnover were seen in Greece (48%) and Spain (47%), as also
reported in 2011.
119
2% 0% 3% 0% 2% 1%
5%
90% 15%
13%
11%
Got smaller
18% 18%
15% 20%
28%
26%
20%
80%
2% 1% 1% 1% 4% 2% 0% 1% 2% 3% 0% 2% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 1% 1%
11%
12%
19% 14%
7%
No growth
22%
24%
16%
16%
7%
13%
27%
35%
12% 13%
24%
30%42%
30%
37%
37%
34%
50% 32%
32%
46%
43%
35%
44%
48%
41%
42%
50%
36%
25%
47%49%
33%
40%
38%
42%
22%
35%
30%29%
30%
21%
25%
14%
20%
31%
26% 25%
25% 29%
17%
17%
37%
23% 22% 26%
27%
19% 20%
14%
27%
27%
27% 31%
35%
35%
19% 18%
LT
BG
RO
LU
MT
SE
CY
DK
PL
SI
UK
FI
NL
EL
LV
FR
HR
HU
EU
PT
SK
BE
DE
EE
AT
ES
IE
IT
CZ
28%
32%
18%
10% 19%18%18%18%17%17%
32%
37%
40%
46% 46%
37%
25%
20%
25%
47%
42% 39%
40%
31%
7% 21% 11%
0% 0%
38%
41%
35%
60%
5%
16%
27%
70%
0%
8%
41%
9%
30%
29% 27%
0%
1% 1% 1% 1%
25%
21%20%
18% 16%
12% 11%
6%
TR
IL
MK
AL
IS
RS
NO
LI
ME
100%
Q16. Over the last three years, how much did your firm grow on average per year..?
Base: All SMEs, % by country
Lithuanian SMEs had the highest level (19%) reporting strong growth (over 20% year on year
for the last three years) in employee numbers, followed by Bulgaria, Romania and
Luxembourg (18% in each reporting strong growth). Taking strong and moderate growth
together over half the SMEs in Lithuania (51%) and Luxembourg (53%) were growing.
Turkish employment by SMEs was also very strong (72% reporting growth in employee size).
However, there were high levels of SMEs reporting falls in employee numbers in Spain
(41%) and Greece (35%), as there were in 2011 (43% and 24% respectively). The situation
has improved somewhat in Ireland, 27% reporting falling employee levels in 2013 (and 33%
rising) compared with 48% falling in 2011 (and only 25% rising).
120
5.1.3 Gazelles
Gazelles are a specific type of high growth company these are companies that are up to
five years old with an average growth over 20% per year, over a period of three years. Nearly
all of the EU countries surveyed included some gazelles. Our analysis looked specifically at
SME gazelles.
The EU countries with the highest proportion of SME gazelles in 2013 were Sweden (5%)
and Romania (5%). Outside the EU, Turkey had a very high level with 13% gazelles.
Gazelles
(companies up to five years old with an average growth greater than 20% per year, over a
three year period)
13%
15%
5%
4%
4%
4%
0%
0%
0%
SE
RO
CY
PL
BG
LV
MT
UK
LT
DK
NL
SK
UK
FR
BE
SI
EL
EU
AT
IT
PT
DE
ES
HR
LU
FI
CZ
HU
IE
EE
TR
AL
IS
NO
RS
IL
MK
LI
ME
2%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
5%
4%
4%
4%
4%
4%
5%
5%
6%
10%
0%
121
Innovative SMEs (i.e. those which had introduced innovation in at least one area of products,
services, production processes, management organisation or sales methods) were more
likely to show high levels of turnover growth (16% in 2013) than non-innovators (10%) and
less likely to be stable non-growers (19% versus 26%). The gap between innovators and
non-innovators for high turnover levels was 6% in 2013, the same size gap as seen in 2011
(also 6% difference). The level of high growth over the past three years has declined from
2009 to 2011 and 2013 for both innovative and non-innovative SMEs.
SME Companies average yearly growth in terms of turnover by year and innovation
2013 EU-28
2011 EU-27
2009 EU-27
INNOVATION
2013 Non-innovative
companies
2011 Non-innovative
companies
2009 Non-innovative
companies
2013 Innovative
companies
2011 Innovative
companies
2009 Innovative
companies
Over 20%
per year
13%
15%
21%
Less than
20% per
year
38%
37%
33%
No
growth
22%
20%
21%
10%
37%
26%
25%
1%
1%
12%
36%
23%
27%
*%
1%
15%
32%
26%
20%
3%
4%
16%
38%
19%
23%
2%
1%
18%
37%
18%
25%
1%
1%
26%
34%
18%
18%
2%
3%
Got
Not
smaller applicable
24%
2%
26%
1%
19%
2%
DKNA
1%
1%
4%
Increased
Remained unchanged
Decreased
DK/NA
Net
score
2013
2011
2009
2013
2011
2009
Turnover
2013
2011
2009
Profit
Profit margin
66
68
28
26
44
36
18
52
52
38
39
36
2013
2011
2009
16
2013
2011
2009
17
19
19
26
30
28
25
2
2
-17%
-11%
-38%
4
3
-28%
-24%
-32%
54
35
36
38
5
44
42
42
49
33
12
45
26
42
20%
3%
12%
-30%
43
41
28
0%
1
1
1
51
26
29
2013
2011
2009
43%
42%
18%
32
29
30
22
1
1
2
18
32
41
60%
62%
26%
9
9
44
35
6 1
6
2
40%
17
60%
11
10
80%
6
15
16%
23%
8%
100%
Q2. The following indicators are relevant for the income generation of your firm. Please tell
me whether the following indicators have decreased, remained unchanged or increased over
the past 6 months in your company.
Base: All SMEs, % EU-28
The net increase for net interest expenses in the last 6 months was lower (+16%, due to 28%
reporting an increase and 12% a decrease).
Results for turnover were evenly more evenly balanced, 35% of EU SME managers reporting
that this had increased but 32% decreased, only a net change of +3%. This is markedly
lower than the 2011 net change of +12% for turnover.
There were net decreases for both profit (-17%) and profit margin (-28%), very similar to the
levels seen in 2011. Over two-fifths reported that each of these had decreased in the last 6
months.
123
2011
2009
6%
24%
15%
43%
33%
51%
49%
52%
61%
12%
21%
20%
28%
26%
29%
2%
20%
28%
34%
40%
40%
42%
41%
42%
42%
43%
46%
45%
51%
48%
52%
54%
51%
42%
33%
40%
54%
60%
67%
80%
63%
100%
0%
-20%
-38%
-40%
TR
IL
IS
NO
MK
ME
RS
LI
AL
-80%
FR
MT
UK
AT
BE
DE
IT
FI
LU
EE
EU
HU
PL
BG
LT
SK
SE
RO
IE
LV
HR
NL
SI
PT
DK
CZ
ES
EL
CY
-60%
Q2. The following indicators are relevant for the income generation of your firm. Please tell
me whether the following indicators have decreased, remained unchanged or increased over
the past 6 months in your company.
Base: All SMEs, % by country
There was a marked spread in the reported net increase in SME labour costs in the last 6
months across the EU. The highest net ratings were seen for France (+67%) and Malta
(+63%). Fifteen of the EU countries reported net levels between +40% and +54%, but ten
countries reported net increases of +34% or less. The smallest net increase was seen in
Spain (+12%) and Greece (+2%) and only Cyprus reported a net decrease (-38%). The
results were broadly similar to 2011 apart from big increases in the net levels in Estonia (up
from +11% to +45%) and Ireland (up from -5% to +34%).
A similar spread of levels was reported in non-EU countries, the highest increase being seen
for SMEs in Turkey (+61%).
124
Situation compared to six months ago: Other cost (materials, energy, other)
2011
2009
35%
27%
47%
45%
56%
55%
73%
60%
24%
30%
25%
35%
31%
49%
43%
35%
40%
46%
50%
49%
53%
51%
57%
54%
58%
57%
59%
58%
60%
62%
61%
67%
71%
71%
64%
59%
60%
78%
80%
75%
100%
20%
-1%
0%
-20%
TR
RS
IL
MK
AL
IS
ME
NO
LI
-60%
UK
IE
IT
FR
RO
DE
MT
EE
EU
HR
HU
AT
PT
FI
PL
BE
LT
LU
LV
ES
EL
BG
SI
CZ
SK
CY
SE
DK
NL
-40%
Q2. The following indicators are relevant for the income generation of your firm. Please tell
me whether the following indicators have decreased, remained unchanged or increased over
the past 6 months in your company.
Base: All SMEs, % by country
All EU countries reported net increase for other costs, and most countries reported levels of
at least +40%. The highest levels were reported in the UK (+78%) and Ireland (+75%), and
there was a similar level seen for Turkey (+73%). The lowest levels were seen for SMEs in
Denmark (+25%) and Netherlands (+24%).
The levels of net increase were similar or a little lower to those seen in 2011. The biggest
falls were seen in Finland (dropping from +79% to +57%) and Cyprus (+57% to +31%). The
biggest increase was in Greece (from +35% in 2011 to +49% in 2013).
125
2011
2009
60%
36%
3%
1%
15%
3%
19%
16%
30%
1%
0%
2%
1%
4%
3%
11%
11%
13%
16%
14%
17%
24%
28%
23%
20%
17%
12%
8%
5%
10%
18%
20%
25%
30%
30%
40%
39%
50%
-1%
-7%
-3%
-3%
-1%
-10%
-2%
0%
-20%
TR
RS
AL
IL
ME
MK
NO
IS
LI
-40%
IT
UK
ES
IE
FR
PT
EL
SI
HU
RO
EU
LV
MT
CY
BG
HR
FI
SK
PL
LU
LT
DK
NL
AT
BE
SE
EE
CZ
DE
-30%
Q2. The following indicators are relevant for the income generation of your firm. Please tell
me whether the following indicators have decreased, remained unchanged or increased over
the past 6 months in your company.
Base: All SMEs, % by country
There was a wide spread in net increases in net interest expenses from +39% in Italy
and +30% for the UK, all the way down to -3% in Estonia and the Czech Republic
and -7% in Germany. In nearly all countries levels have fallen considerably from
2011, except in Italy (up from 37% to 39%) and the UK (up from +20% to +30%).
126
2011
2009
3%
1%
16%
6%
31%
37%
1%
2%
2%
5%
3%
9%
6%
12%
10%
14%
14%
16%
15%
20%
26%
26%
19%
20%
26%
40%
29%
60%
25%
58%
80%
-13%
-5%
-2%
-8%
-17%
-26%
-29%
-40%
-6%
-20%
-4%
-1%
0%
-61%
-60%
TR
IS
NO
MK
IL
ME
LI
RS
AL
-100%
UK
SE
DK
DE
AT
LU
EE
RO
IE
LT
LV
PL
BG
BE
FI
EU
SI
HU
SK
FR
PT
MT
CZ
HR
NL
EL
ES
IT
CY
-80%
Q2. The following indicators are relevant for the income generation of your firm. Please tell
me whether the following indicators have decreased, remained unchanged or increased over
the past 6 months in your company.
Base: All SMEs, % by country
For turnover eighteen of the EU countries reported a net increase but ten countries saw a net
decrease. The biggest net increases were reported by SMEs in the UK (+29%), Sweden,
Denmark and Germany (all +26%). However, there were large decreases reported in Spain (26%), Italy (-29%) and Cyprus (-61%).
About half the EU countries reported a lower net increase than in 2011, the biggest falls
being seen for Finland (down from +48% to +5%), Cyprus (from -9% to -61%) and
Netherlands (down from +25% to -8%). However, in some countries the net increase had
improved since 2011, in particular in Malta (-40% to -4%) and Ireland (from -7% to +14%).
127
2011
2009
60%
2%
14%
22%
1%
1%
2%
2%
6%
2%
19%
11%
20%
16%
40%
-27%
-18%
-20%
-3%
-5%
TR
IS
NO
MK
IL
LI
ME
RS
AL
-49%
-54%
-41%
-47%
-34%
DK
SE
DE
UK
RO
LV
AT
LT
PL
BG
LU
FI
HR
EE
IE
SK
BE
CZ
NL
EU
SI
HU
MT
PT
FR
ES
EL
IT
CY
-60%
-36%
-19%
-29%
-17%
-40%
-80%
-17%
-13%
-13%
-9%
-12%
-8%
-7%
-7%
-4%
-9%
-20%
-6%
-1%
0%
Q2. The following indicators are relevant for the income generation of your firm. Please tell
me whether the following indicators have decreased, remained unchanged or increased over
the past 6 months in your company.
Base: All SMEs, % by country
There was also a wide spread of results for changes in profit. The biggest net increases were
in Denmark (+19%) and Sweden (+11%), but only eight EU countries reported a positive net
increase. The majority of countries reported net decreases and these were worst in Greece (47%), Italy (-49%) and Cyprus (-54%).
In 16 countries the net increase was lower than seen in 2011. In particular there were
considerable falls in Lithuania (from +38% to +1% in 2013) and France (from -3% to -36%).
But results had improved in some countries since 2011, in particular for Bulgaria (-35% to 4%) and Malta (-63% to -29%).
128
2011
2009
10%
16%
5%
20%
22%
30%
-50%
-60%
-70%
-35%
-19%
-8%
-3%
-5%
-16%
-16%
-18%
-15%
-16%
-14%
-15%
-12%
-13%
-11%
-12%
-11%
-7%
-1%
-32%
-40%
IS
TR
NO
MK
RS
IL
LI
AL
ME
-30%
-11%
-20%
DK
SE
RO
LV
EE
UK
LT
PL
DE
SK
SI
FI
BG
NL
AT
BE
-27%
LU
-28%
EU
-30%
IE
-31%
CZ
-33%
HU
-36%
MT
-40%
FR
-42%
HR
-45%
PT
-52%
ES
-55%
IT
-56%
EL
CY-64%
-10%
-5%
0%
Q2. The following indicators are relevant for the income generation of your firm. Please tell
me whether the following indicators have decreased, remained unchanged or increased over
the past 6 months in your company.
Base: All SMEs, % by country
There was also considerable variation for net improvement levels for profit margin. Only
SMEs in Denmark (+16%) and Sweden (+5%) reported net increases in profit margin over
the past six months. Fourteen EU countries reported net changes of no worse than -20% but
there were especially low figures for Cyprus (-64% of SMEs reporting a net increase),
Greece (-56%), Italy (-55%) and Spain (-52%).
Outside the EU only SMEs in Israel reported a positive net increase in profit margins (+22%).
In the majority of EU countries results were worse (lower + net increase levels) in 2013 than
in 2011. Big falls were seen for Lithuania (+9% to -11%), France (-17% to -40%), Croatia (21% to -42%) and Italy (-39% to -55%). Among the few improved results the biggest
improvements were seen in Malta (from -64% in 2011 to -36%) and Bulgaria (from -34% to 15%).
129
A deterioration in their financial situation (i.e. had decreased for at least two of the
three financial aspects) two-fifths (41%) of EU SMEs had seen such a change. This
is slightly worse than the 38% level seen in 2011.
An improvement in their financial situation (i.e. had increased for at least two of the
three financial aspects) a quarter (25%), down from 28% in 2011
No change in their financial situation (i.e. had remained unchanged for at least two of
the three financial aspects), also known as stagnant (28%) which was slightly higher
than the 2011 level of 26%
Clear majorities of SMEs in Cyprus (65%), Italy (61%), Greece (59%) and Spain (58%) were
classified as experiencing a deteriorating financial situation as defined above. These levels
were lower (i.e. less worse) than reported in 2011 for Greece (67% deteriorating in 2011) and
Spain (64% in 2011) but higher for Cyprus (56% in 2011) and Italy (50%).
Improvement in their financial situation was most likely to be reported in Denmark (42% of
SMEs) and the UK (39%). These results were similar to the 2011 levels (45% and 37%
respectively).
Company characteristics
Large EU companies (LSEs with 250+ employees) had a significantly higher net increase
score than SMEs for changes in turnover over the last 6 months (+29% versus +3%). The
difference was even greater when compared to micro-SMEs (with only 1-9 employees) which
had a net increase of -11% for turnover (i.e. shrinking). Along with LSEs, small and medium
sized SMEs were also clearly growing (+13% for 10-49 employee businesses and +17% for
those with 50-249 staff). Industrial sector SMEs had the strongest score for turnover (+8%),
just ahead of the service sector (+4%), with the construction sector having the lowest net
score (-6%). Gazelles had a very high net increase in turnover (+56%) but there was much
less difference between innovators (+8%) and non-innovators (-4%).
There was a similar pattern for profit with LSEs having a positive net increase score (+6%),
i.e. overall profits were growing. However, EU SMEs overall had a net decrease (-17%) over
the last 6 months for profits, with micro-SMEs (-27%) having the lowest net score and the
largest SMEs the least negative (-7% for 50-249 employee businesses). Industry based
SMEs had the strongest, though negative, net score (-11%) and construction the worst (30%). Gazelles had the strongest results for SMEs (+17%).
Very similar results were seen for profit margins, although very few groups reported these as
growing. LSEs had a net increase of -6%, far better than seen for SMEs (-28%) overall.
However, there was not such a large difference between the micro-SMEs (-33%) and the
largest SMEs (-19%) as was seen for profits. The construction sector had the worst result (41% for profit margin). Gazelles were the only type of SMEs to report a positive net increase
(but less than +0.5%).
Comparisons of the various cost pressures revealed a similar pattern by size for labour costs
and net interest expenses but not for other costs.
130
Labour cost increases over the last 6 months were strongest among LSEs (+51% versus
43% for SMEs) and weakest but still increasing for the micro-SMEs (+39%). The services
sector reported the largest increase (+45%) and construction the lowest (but still +36%). The
smallest increase was reported by SMEs that were getting smaller (+17% net increase).
Other cost increases, however, were broadly similar across all company sizes (+51% for
LSEs and +60% for SMEs) and the differences between SME sectors were also small
(ranging from +56% to +61%).
Net interest expenses, like labour costs, did vary by size. The net increase reported was
lowest for LSEs (-1% versus +16% for SMEs overall) but strongest for the micro-SMEs
(+21% compared with +5% for the largest SMEs with 50-249 employees). There was less
difference between SME sectors, with construction the highest (+24%) and industry (+10%)
the lowest.
2013
2011
14
14
19
2009
10
19
2
21
20
25
27
39
Increased
40
Remained unchanged
Decreased
47
Not applicable
DK/NA
Q3. Would you say that the amount of debt compared to the assets of your company has
decreased, remained unchanged or increased over the past 6 months Base:
All SMEs, % EU-28
Country variations
The largest proportion of SMEs for most EU countries reported seeing no change in their
debts-to-assets ratio over the last 6 months. Comparing the net increase scores by country
showed that most were broadly similar, but there were some clear outliers. SMEs in Italy
131
(+14% net increase) and Cyprus (+11%) were the only countries to show a marked positive
net increase in the ratio. In contrast four countries (Finland, Denmark, Slovenia and Croatia)
reported improvements greater than -20% in their ratio. Outside the EU Norway showed the
lowest net increase (-25%).
There was a significant increase in the ratio (debts to assets) in Cyprus from 2011 (-7%) to
2013 (+11%) and in Lithuania (-20% to -2%). The biggest drops in the ratio (i.e. improved
debt to asset ratios) were in Slovenia (-7% to -34%) and Croatia (+5% to -34%)
Companies debt-to-assets ratio
2011
2009
40%
8%
14%
20%
11%
30%
4%
0%
3%
10%
-25%
-17%
-17%
-13%
-14%
-5%
-23%
-19%
-21%
-16%
-17%
-15%
-9%
TR
IL
AL
RS
IS
ME
MK
LI
NO
-40%
IT
CY
RO
BG
LU
EL
LT
IE
ES
PL
EU
HU
CZ
UK
FR
SK
PT
MT
BE
LV
NL
SE
DE
EE
AT
FI
DK
SI -34%
HR -34%
-30%
-16%
-13%
-11%
-12%
-10%
-11%
-9%
-8%
-10%
-14%
-20%
-8%
-7%
-7%
-2%
-6%
0%
-10%
-1%
0%
Q3. Would you say that the amount of debt compared to the assets of your company has
decreased, remained unchanged or increased over the past 6 months Base:
All SMEs, % countries
Company characteristics
LSEs reported that their debt-to-asset ratio had improved over the last 6 months (with a net
increase of -13%). This was slightly lower than for EU SMEs overall (-8%) with the largest
SMEs (net decrease of -10% for 50-249 employees) closer to LSE levels than micro-SMEs (5%).
The net score for construction sector SMEs was about evenly balanced (+0.3%) whilst
industrial SMEs had the lowest ratio (-11%). High growth SMEs had the lowest ratio (-14%
versus +1% for SMEs that were getting smaller).
132
Technical Annex
133
Appendix 1: Sampling
The survey sample was selected randomly but disproportionately according to two criteria:
-
Company size micro (1-9 employees), small (10-49 employees), medium (50-249
employees) and large (250+ employees)
The survey excluded firms in the following sectors agriculture, fishing, public
administration, financial services, activities of households, extra-territorial organisations and
bodies, holding companies (on the basis of the NACE rev 1.1 code 7415). The statistical
stratification took into account economic activities at the 0-digit level of the European NACENomenclature v1.1. Interviews were conducted in the C, D, F, G, H, I, K, M, N and O sectors.
Therefore firms from the following sectors were sampled:
C
Manufacturing
Construction
Overall, 14,859 interviews were conducted across 37 countries, including 13,855 interviews
across the EU 28 countries, between 28th August and 14th October 2013, using a CATI
(Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing) methodology throughout. Only eligible
individuals within each company were surveyed (i.e. those with responsibility for the
companys financial decisions, such as MDs/CEOs, FDs and other equivalent job functions).
As a general principle, the sample in each country was stratified by size classes as follows:
134
These benchmarks had to be slightly adapted to the number of enterprises available within
each stratum in the universe of companies corresponding to a few countries. An additional
stratification by sector (industry, construction, trade, services) was also carried out in all
countries. However, due to the size variance across the various business sectors, no quotas
were set in this phase of sampling for the various industry sectors (implicit stratification was
implemented).
The sample used for the survey is (after weighting) representative of the population of firms
in each of the eleven countries and for the following size classes:
Dun & Bradstreet provided the sample lists according to the above outlined criteria (within
strata the random selection of firms was carried out by Dun & Bradstreet). All respondents
were screened to ensure that only qualified individuals were interviewed. Participating job
functions included Managing Director/Owner/Proprietor, Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer/Head of Finance (the person most knowledgeable about the financial
situation of the firm).
500
501
177
180
114
30
Belgium
500
500
195
205
85
15
Bulgaria
500
502
151
151
150
50
Croatia
100
100
30
30
30
10
Cyprus
100
100
30
30
30
10
Czech
Republic
500
429
74
150
155
50
Denmark
500
500
145
155
150
50
Estonia
100
100
30
30
30
10
Finland
500
501
201
200
85
15
France
1,000
1,002
300
300
301
101
Germany
1,000
1,000
300
300
300
100
Greece
500
500
200
199
86
15
Hungary
500
500
150
151
149
50
Ireland
500
500
200
200
85
15
1,000
1,000
300
300
300
100
Latvia
200
200
60
60
60
20
Lithuania
300
301
79
98
92
32
Italy
135
Luxembourg
100
100
30
30
30
10
Malta
100
100
30
30
30
10
Netherlands
500
500
180
185
105
30
1,000
1,011
308
300
303
100
Portugal
500
500
180
180
110
30
Romania
500
500
155
154
145
46
Slovakia
300
300
85
90
95
30
Slovenia
100
100
30
30
30
10
1,000
1,001
300
301
300
100
500
507
148
159
150
50
UK
1,000
1,000
300
300
300
100
EU-28 TOTAL
13,900
13,855
4,368
4,498
3,800
1,189
Albania
90
90
30
32
28
Israel
90
90
25
34
31
Iceland
100
100
34
33
33
Liechtenstein
50
51
19
19
13
Montenegro
90
90
30
35
25
FYROM
90
90
30
30
30
Norway
150
150
45
54
51
Serbia
90
90
30
30
30
Turkey
250
253
78
91
84
TOTAL
14,900
14,859
4,689
4,856
4,125
1,189
Poland
Spain
Sweden
136
Appendix 2: Questionnaire
Final questionnaire for a survey on access to finance of EU SMEs
(Common version), September 2013 survey (Wave 9)
Hello, my name is [interviewer] and I am calling from [NON-UK: Ipsos / UK: Ipsos MORI] on
behalf of the European Commission and the European Central Bank. Your business has
been selected to participate in a European-wide survey on the financing needs and the
availability of financing among companies like yours.
[INTERVIEWER, READ OUT ONLY IF RESPONDENT IS FROM PANEL: You may
remember that we spoke to you about six months ago and you kindly said that you would be
willing to participate again in the survey at around this time.]
[INTERVIEWER, READ OUT ONLY IF RESPONDENTS ASK FOR MORE INFORMATION
ABOUT THE PROJECT: The results of the survey will help in the European Commissions
evidence-based policy making to improve the access to finance for enterprises and in the
monetary policy of the European Central Bank. Can I email or fax you some more
information about the survey?]
May I speak with the person who would best be able to provide information on how your
enterprise is financed?
Your answers to this voluntary survey will be treated in strict confidence, used for statistical
purposes and published in aggregate form only.
Section 1: General characteristics of the firm (Demographic part, common)
[COMMON] D2. How would you characterise your enterprise? Is it...
[READ OUT ONLY ONE ANSWER]
- part of a profit-oriented enterprise (e.g. subsidiary* or branch) not
taking fully autonomous financial decisions .....................................................1
- an autonomous profit-oriented enterprise, making independent
financial decisions ** ......................................................................................2
- a non-profit enterprise (foundation, association, semi-government) .................3
- [DK/NA] ...........................................................................................................9
* SUBSIDIARIES AND BRANCHES ARE CONTROLLED BY A PARENT COMPANY,
WHICH OWNS THE MAJORITY OR ALL OF THE CAPITAL OF THESE ENTITIES. IN
CONTRAST TO A BRANCH, A SUBSIDIARY IS A SEPARATE, DISTINCT LEGAL ENTITY.
** IN THE SENSE OF MAKING INDEPENDENT MANAGEMENT DECISIONS (THIS
INCLUDES PARTNERSHIPS AND CO-OPERATIVES).
[IF 3 (NON-PROFIT) STOP INTERVIEW]
137
[COMMON]8 D1. How many people does your company currently employ either full or
part time in [YOUR COUNTRY] at all its locations? PLEASE DONT INCLUDE UNPAID
FAMILY WORKERS AND FREELANCERS WORKING REGULARLY FOR YOUR
COMPANY.
[READ OUT ONLY ONE ANSWER]
NUMERICAL ANSWER[1-999999]
[DK/NA]
[IF 0 EMPLOYEES STOP INTERVIEW INTERVIEW NOT VALID]
[IF NA/DK STOP INTERVIEW INTERVIEW NOT VALID]
THE COMPANY MUST HAVE AT LEAST 1 EMPLOYEE BEYOND THE FOUNDER(S), IF
THE FOUNDER IS THE ONLY EMPLOYEE WE STILL CONSIDER THAT TO BE A 0
EMPLOYEE FIRM. FULL-TIME AND PART-TIME EMPLOYEES SHOULD EACH COUNT
AS ONE EMPLOYEE. UNPAID FAMILY WORKERS AND EMPLOYEES WORKING LESS
THAN 12 HOURS PER WEEK ARE TO BE EXCLUDED.
For reference purposes, here are the categories that are used for the analysis
-
The tags [COMMON], [ENTR] and [ECB] indicate whether the question is common to the ECB and
the European Commission (DG-ENTR), or specific to the Commission or the ECB, respectively.
[COMMON] and [ECB] questions are asked every 6 months, while [ENTR] questions are only asked
every two years. [ECB] questions are only asked in the euro area.
138
[COMMON] D4. What was the annual turnover of your company in [YOUR COUNTRY]
in 2012?
[READ OUT ONLY ONE ANSWER IS POSSIBLE]
[For non-euro countries the amounts in euro will be converted to national currency.]
-
Up to 2 million ...............................................................................................1
More than 2 million and up to 10 million .....................................................2
More than 10 million and up to 50 million ..................................................3
More than 50 million ....................................................................................4
[DK/NA] ...........................................................................................................9
[COMMON] D6. Who are the owners of your firm? Please select the most appropriate
category in terms of majority holders if more than one category applies.
[READ OUT ONLY ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE]
- Public shareholders, as your company is listed on the stock market ................1
- Family or entrepreneurs [MORE THAN ONE OWNER] ...................................2
- Other firms or business associates ..................................................................3
- Venture capital firms or business angels [INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS
PROVIDING
CAPITAL
AND/OR
KNOW-HOW
TO
YOUNG
INNOVATIVE FIRMS] ..........................................................................................4
- A natural person, one owner only ...................................................................5
- Other ...............................................................................................................7
- [DK/NA] ...........................................................................................................9
[COMMON] D6b. What is the gender of the owner/director/CEO of your firm?
[READ OUT ONLY ONE ANSWER IS POSSIBLE]
- Male ................................................................................................................1
- Female ............................................................................................................2
- [DK/NA] ...........................................................................................................9
139
[FILTER: IF TWO OR MORE ITEMS HAVE THE HIGHEST SCORE IN QUESTION Q0b,
ASK Q0c. IF DK/NA RESPONSES FOR ALL ISSUES AT Q0B, THEN SKIP TO Q1]
[COMMON] Q0c: I see that you have given an equally high score to several problems.
If you compare them, which one of them is more pressing than the other[s], even if it
is by a very small margin?
[ROTATE - ONLY ONE ANSWER IS POSSIBLE LIST ONLY THOSE THAT HAVE THE
HIGHEST SCORE OF QUESTION Q0b]
-
[ALL FIRMS]
[ENTR] Q1. During the past 12 months have you introduced...?
[READ OUT ONE ANSWER PER LINE]
- Yes
....................................................................................... 1
- No
....................................................................................... 2
- [DK/NA]
....................................................................................... 9
a new or significantly improved product or service to the market ................... 1 2 9
a new or significantly improved production process or method ...................... 1 2 9
a new organisation of management ............................................................... 1 2 9
a new way of selling your goods or services .................................................. 1 2 9
140
[COMMON] Q2. The following indicators are relevant for the income generated by your
firm. Please tell me whether the following indicators have decreased, remained
unchanged or increased over the past 6 months in your company?
[READ OUT ONLY ONE ANSWER PER LINE]
-
Increased ........................................................................ 1
Remained unchanged ..................................................... 2
Decreased ....................................................................... 3
[DK/NA] ........................................................................... 9
a)
b)
c)
d)
Turnover ..................................................................................................... 1 2 3 9
Labour cost (including social contributions)................................................. 1 2 3 9
Other cost (materials, energy, other) .......................................................... 1 2 3 9
Net interest expenses [= INTEREST EXPENSES MINUS INTEREST
INCOME = WHAT YOU PAY IN INTEREST FOR YOUR DEBT MINUS
WHAT YOU RECEIVE IN INTEREST FOR YOUR ASSETS] ..................... 1 2 3 9
e) Profit [= NET INCOME AFTER TAXES] ...................................................... 1 2 3 9
f) Profit margin [= THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SELLING PRICE
AND THE COST PRICE FOR EACH UNIT] ................................................ 1 2 3 9
[COMMON] Q3. Would you say that the amount of debt compared to the assets of your
company has decreased, remained unchanged or increased over the past 6 months?
[READ OUT ONLY ONE ANSWER IS POSSIBLE]
-
Increased.........................................................................................................1
Remained unchanged......................................................................................2
Decreased .......................................................................................................3
[NOT APPLICABLE, THE FIRM HAS NO DEBT] ............................................7
[DK] .................................................................................................................9
141
142
[COMMON] Q5. For each of the following types of external financing, please tell me if
your needs increased, remained unchanged or decreased over the past 6 months?
[READ OUT ONE ANSWER PER LINE]
- Increased ........................................................................ 1
- Remained unchanged ..................................................... 2
- Decreased ....................................................................... 3
- [INSTRUMENT NOT APPLICABLE TO MY
FIRM] .................................................................................. 7
- [DK] ................................................................................. 9
f)
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
[ECB]Q6. For each of the following items, would you say that they have increased,
decreased, or had no impact on your firms needs for external financing over the past
6 months?
[READ OUT ONE ANSWER PER LINE]
-
[INTERVIEWER READ:] For the following item, if that has occurred during the past 6
months, please indicate if it has increased or decreased your firm's needs for external
financing. [IF THE ITEM DID NOT OCCUR IN THE PAST 6 MONTHS, CODE 7 = NOT
RELEVANT/DID NOT OCCUR]
143
d)
a)
b)
c)
Applied ............................................................................ 1
Did not apply because of possible rejection ..................... 2
Did not apply because of sufficient internal funds ............ 3
Did not apply for other reasons ........................................ 4
[DK/NA] ........................................................................... 9
[FILTER: FOR EACH OF THE ITEMS OF Q7A WHICH IS APPLIED, FILL THE
RELEVANT ITEM IN Q7B]
[COMMON] Q7B. If you applied and tried to negotiate for this type of financing over the
past 6 months, did you: receive all the financing you requested; receive only part of
the financing you requested; refuse to proceed because of unacceptable costs or
terms and conditions; or have you not received anything at all? [PROMPT IF NEEDED:
Other external financing includes loans from other lenders, equity or debt issuance,
leasing, factoring, etc., but excludes overdrafts, credit lines, bank loans and trade
credit]
[READ OUT ONLY ONE ANSWER PER LINE]
[COMMON] Q9. For each of the following ways of financing, would you say that their
availability has improved, remained unchanged or deteriorated for your firm over the
past 6 months?
[READ OUT ONE ANSWER PER LINE]
- Improved ......................................................................... 1
- Remained unchanged ..................................................... 2
- Deteriorated..................................................................... 3
- [NOT APPLICABLE TO MY FIRM {ONLY IF
CODES 2 TO 9 AT Q7A}]..................................................... 7
- [DK] ................................................................................. 9
144
[FILTER: ALL FIRMS. CODE 7 IS NOT TO BE USED FOR FIRMS HAVING APPLIED IN
Q7A.d), Q7A.a) and Q7A.b) RESPECTIVELY]
f) Bank overdraft, credit line or credit cards overdraft ................................. 1 2 3 7 9
a) Bank loans (new or renewal; excluding overdraft and credit lines) .......... 1 2 3 7 9
b) Trade credit............................................................................................. 1 2 3 7 9
[FILTER: IF ANY OF Q7A IS 1 APPLIED OR 2 DID NOT APPLY BECAUSE OF
POSSIBLE REJECTION]
c) Equity [INCLUDING VENTURE CAPITAL OR BUSINESS ANGELS] ...... 1 2 3 7 9
d) Debt securities issued.............................................................................. 1 2 3 7 9
e) Other [LOAN FROM A RELATED COMPANY OR SHAREHOLDERS
AND FROM FAMILY AND FRIENDS, LEASING AND FACTORING,
GRANTS] ................................................................................................ 1 2 3 7 9
[FILTER: ALL FIRMS]
[COMMON] Q11. The availability of external financing depends on various factors,
which are in part related to the general economic situation, to your company's
situation and to lenders attitudes. For each of the following factors, would you say
that they have improved, remained unchanged or deteriorated over the past 6
months?
[READ OUT ONE ANSWER PER LINE]
- Improved ......................................................................... 1
- Remained unchanged ..................................................... 2
- Deteriorated..................................................................... 3
- [NOT APPLICABLE TO MY FIRM [FOR b), f), g),
h)] ....................................................................................... 7
- [DK] ................................................................................. 9
a) General economic outlook, insofar as it affects the availability of
external financing ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 9
b) Access to public financial support including guarantees .......................... 1 2 3 7 9
c) Your firm-specific outlook with respect to your sales and profitability
or business plan, insofar as it affects the availability of external
financing for you ......................................................................................... 1 2 3 9
d) Your firms own capital ................................................................................ 1 2 3 9
e) Your firms credit history ............................................................................. 1 2 3 9
[FOR THE FOLLOWING TWO ITEMS, CODE 7 IS NOT TO BE USED FOR
FIRMS HAVING APPLIED IN Q7A.a) and Q7A.b) RESPECTIVELY]
f) Willingness of banks to provide a loan ..................................................... 1 2 3 7 9
g) Willingness of business partners to provide trade credit .......................... 1 2 3 7 9
h) Willingness of investors to invest in equity or debt securities issued by
your firm .................................................................................................. 1 2 3 7 9
145
146
[FILTER: Q12 IS 2, 3, 4, OR 5]
[ENTR] Q13. Who provided you with this last loan?
[READ OUT ONLY ONE ANSWER IS POSSIBLE]
- Bank ............................................................................... 1
- Private individual - family or friend................................... 2
- Other sources (e.g. microfinance institutions,
government-related sources) ........................................ 3
- [DK/NA] ........................................................................... 9
[FILTER: Q12 IS 2, 3, 4, OR 5]
[ENTR] Q14. What did you use this last loan for?
[READ OUT ROTATE SEVERAL ANSWERS POSSIBLE]
- Working capital ............................................................... 1
- Land/ buildings or Equipment/vehicles ............................ 2
- Research and development or intellectual property ......... 3
- Promotion ....................................................................... 4
- Staff training .................................................................... 5
- Buying another business ................................................. 6
- Other............................................................................... 7
- [DK/NA] ........................................................................... 9
Section 4: Future, growth and obstacles to growth
[ENTR] Q16.Over the last three years (2009-2012), how much did your firm grow on average
per year ?
[READ OUT ONE ANSWER PER LINE]
- Over 20% per year .......................................................... 1
- Less than 20% per year .................................................. 2
- No growth ....................................................................... 3
- Got smaller ..................................................................... 4
- [NOT APPLICABLE, THE FIRM IS TOO RECENT]......... 7
- [DK/NA] ........................................................................... 9
A., in terms of employment regarding the number of full time or full-time
equivalent employees ?.................................................................... 1 2 3 4 7 9
B., and in terms of turnover? ................................................................. 1 2 3 4 7 9
[ENTR] Q17.Considering the turnover over the next two to three years (2014-2016), how much
does your company expect to grow per year?
[READ OUT ONLY ONE ANSWER IS POSSIBLE]
- Grow substantially - over 20% per year in terms of
turnover ........................................................................ 1
- Grow moderately - below 20% per year in terms of
turnover ........................................................................ 2
- Stay the same size .......................................................... 3
- Become smaller .............................................................. 4
- [DK/NA] ........................................................................... 9
147
[ENTR] Q19.
Do you feel confident to talk about financing with banks and to obtain the
desired results? And how about equity investors/ venture capital firms?
[READ OUT ONE ANSWER PER LINE]
- Yes ................................................................................. 1
- No ................................................................................... 2
- [NOT APPLICABLE]........................................................ 7
- [DK]................................................................................. 9
A., With banks ................................................................................................. 1 2 7 9
B., With equity investors/ venture capital firms ................................................ 1 2 7 9
[ASK IF Q17=1 OR 2]
[ENTR] Q20.
If you need external financing to realise your growth ambitions, what type
of external financing would you prefer most? [ASK THIS AND NEXT TWO QUESTION IF
Q17 = 1 OR 2 (FIRM EXPECTS TO GROW)]
[READ OUT ROTATE- ONLY ONE ANSWER IS POSSIBLE]
- Bank loan
....................................................................................... 1
- Loan from other sources (E.G. TRADE CREDIT, RELATED
COMPANY, SHAREHOLDER, PUBLIC SOURCES) ............................. 2
- Equity investment [INCLUDING VENTURE CAPITAL OR
BUSINESS ANGELS] ............................................................................. 3
- Subordinated loans, participating loans, preferred stocks or similar
financing instruments [ALL TYPES OF MEZZANINE FINANCING
THAT CONTAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF BOTH DEBT AND
EQUITY FOR EXAMPLE, A LOAN THAT RANKS BELOW
OTHER DEBTS IF A COMPANY GOES INTO LIQUIDIDATION
OR FILES FOR BANKRUPTCY, OR A LOAN THAT GIVES THE
LENDER THE RIGHT TO CONVERT THE LOAN TO AN
OWNERSHIP OR EQUITY INTEREST IN THE COMPANY
UNDER SPECIFIED CLAUSES AND CONDITIONS] ........................... 4
- Other
....................................................................................... 5
- [DK/NA]
....................................................................................... 9
[ENTR] Q21. And what amount of financing would you aim to obtain?
[READ OUT ONLY ONE ANSWER IS POSSIBLE]
- Smaller than 25,000 ...................................................... 1
- 25,000- 99,999 ............................................................ 2
- 100,000 - 249,999 ....................................................... 5
- 250,000 - 1 million ....................................................... 6
- Over 1 million ................................................................ 4
- [DK/NA] ........................................................................... 9
[FOR NON-EURO COUNTRIES THE AMOUNTS IN EURO SHOULD BE CONVERTED TO NATIONAL
CURRENCY.]
148
[ENTR] Q22. What do you see as the most important limiting factor to get this
financing?
[ASK IF BANK OR OTHER LOAN (1 OR 2 IN Q20):]
A.
[READ OUT ONLY ONE ANSWER IS POSSIBLE]
- There are no obstacles ................................................... 8
- Insufficient collateral or guarantee................................... 1
- Interest rates or price too high......................................... 2
- Reduced control over the firm ......................................... 3
- Financing not available at all ........................................... 4
- Other............................................................................... 5
- [DK/NA] ........................................................................... 9
[ASK IF EQUITY INVESTMENT OR MEZZANINE (3 OR 4 IN Q20):]
B.
[READ OUT ONLY ONE ANSWER IS POSSIBLE]
- There are no obstacles ................................................... 8
- Interest rates or price too high......................................... 2
- Reduced control over the firm ......................................... 3
- Financing not available at all ........................................... 4
- Other............................................................................... 5
- [DK/NA] ........................................................................... 9
[FILTER: ALL FIRMS]
[COMMON] Q23. For each of the following types of financing available to your firm,
could you please indicate whether you think their availability will improve, deteriorate,
or remain unchanged over the next 6 months?
[READ OUT ONE ANSWER PER LINE]
-
149
[ENTR]
Q24. On a scale of 1-10, where 10 means it is extremely important and 1
means it is not at all important, how important are each of the following factors for
your companys financing in the future?
[READ OUT ONE ANSWER PER LINE. DK/NA OPTION PERMITTED]
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
C1/ Thank you for taking part in this survey. Would you like to receive a copy of the
published results? SINGLE CODE
Yes
No
1
- READ OUT: Please confirm your email address and we will send you the link
for the publication. WRITE IN EMAIL ADDRESS
2
C2/ The survey will be repeated in about six months, with a shorter questionnaire.
Would you be willing to participate in that survey as well? SINGLE CODE
Yes
No
150
BE
Iceland
IS
Bulgaria
BG
Liechtenstein
LI
Croatia
HR
Norway
NO
Czech Republic
CZ
Montenegro
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
ME
9
Denmark
DK
Germany
DE
Turkey
TR
Estonia
EE
Albania
AL
Ireland
IE
Serbia
RS
Greece
EL
Israel
IL
Spain
ES
France
FR
Italy
IT
Cyprus
CY
Latvia
LV
Lithuania
LT
Luxembourg
LU
Hungary
HU
Malta
MT
Netherlands
NL
Austria
AT
Poland
PL
Portugal
PT
Romania
RO
Slovenia
SI
Slovakia
SK
Finland
FI
Sweden
SE
United Kingdom
UK
MK
Provisional abbreviation which in no way pre-judges the definitive name of this country, which will be
agreed once the current negotiations at the United Nations have been completed
151